500 words a day on whatever I want

The map of white people

The map of white people was not on the Internet, so I made one. Conversely, it is a map of people of colour.

The map (click on it to enlarge) uses four colours:

dark blue: 75% to 100% white

medium blue: 50% to 75% white

light blue: 25% to 50% white

grey: 0% to 25% white

So:

majority POC: grey and light blue

majority white: medium and dark blue

multiracial: light and medium blue

But who is white? For this map two kinds of people are:

Those who self-identify as white, like in a census.

Those who belong to an ethnic group that is historically Christian or Jewish, with roots in West Eurasia.

That means white Hispanics, Armenians and Lebanese Christians are in, most Africans and Muslims, even Albanians, are out.

In the case of self-identification, note that someone who is considered white in one country might not be considered white in another.

I tried different definitions. This one is clean, easy to use and a good, general approximation.

Notes on each region:

North America: While the rest of the map is based on data from 2006 to 2011, Mexico is based on the last census that asked about race: in 1921! For the US, Hispanics who identify as white are counted as white. Doing otherwise led to paradoxes outside the US. Notice that Canada is not as lily-white as many imagine.

South America: Argentina, the pope’s home country, is extremely white. Its most “diverse” province, Chubut, is close to 90% white.

Most whites in South America, like in North America, live outside the tropics, which run from Havana to Rio. Worldwide most whites live in the temperate zone, 23.5 to 66.5 degrees from the equator:

Europe, North Africa and West Asia: Albania and Kosovo are mostly Muslim so they do not count as white, even though they are in Europe. I did not use “Europe” or “European” in my definition of white because then I would have to define Europe too! Not a battle I wanted or needed to fight.

Siberia: The people in the dark blue region are mainly ethnic Russians. Russia and Kazakhstan keep very good records on ethnicity.

The rest of Africa: The surprise here is South Africa. I thought at least the Cape would be light blue. Whites are less than 25% in every single province. The way they complained you would think they were like a third of the country. It is galling to see this.

The rest of Asia: The dark blue at the top is the tail end of Russia.

Oceania: The North Island of New Zealand is more multiracial than Australia, mostly because of the Maori.

Because Australia, Siberia, Canada and Argentina are large but thinly settled, the map makes it seem like there are more white people than there are.

To correct that, let’s scale each region according to its total population and put the map back together:

Notice that whites are not the main part of the world, but only a sixth of it.

Share this post:

Like this:

521 Responses

This is awesome. I really appreciated the time it took to make this.
I see one glaring problem:
You wrote that you couldn’t count Albanians as white because they were Muslim. This doesn’t make any sense.
There are plenty of white Muslims!
Albanians are of Illyrian background, pre-Indo-European. Bosnians, Chechens, and even some Turks are pretty white looking people. Just curious why you’d erroneously link religion to race.
Otherwise, enjoyable piece.

Who on earth imagines that? I suppose the same people who thought “American” meant “white”?

Also, I noticed that quite a few people in Argentina were likely mestizo, but identified as “white”. In any case, Buenos Aires looked a lot more white and European to me than any large city I have ever been to in North America.

It’s interesting to see how Israel is basically a white settler colony. But then again, so is America. Pretty much every “white” country outside Europe is a product of racism and imperialism. Even Russia, a non-Western “white” country, has colonized land all the way across Asia.

In 1900, Europe alone made up 25% of the world population, and Europe was nearly all white. It was during the age of New Imperialism, when Europe’s population was bursting at the seams, that you saw white people flooding into white colonies like the US, Canada, Argentina, Brazil, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, and basically any place outside Europe that had weather similar to back home. Whites felt entitled to take over nonwhite-inhabited lands and swamped those lands with their numbers. And now whites are turning around and complaining that nonwhites are infesting “their” land, most of which was taken from nonwhites, anyway.

You categorized Mother Teresa as white. Are Albanians white simply because they’re Christian or nonwhite simply because they’re Muslim? I’ve known a handful of Muslims who were definitely white by American standards. Their own white acquaintances were often extremely surprised to learn that their fellow white compatriots practiced “the enemy’s” religion.

Very weird definition of white. How can you link race to religion? Have you seen albanians? They are white as shit, just like bosniak and lots of Chechen, blond hair with often blue eyes.

Here’s a picture of’em. they are very white. they are whiter than Greeks and Romanians who have a majority of dark hair, darker skin than these guys and I’ve seen algerians who could be taken for white or european. If I go to France or England, there is a big possibility of being called gypsy thieves (as it happened), but these people, especially Bosnian and Albanians are taken for white. Also I have met really dark skin Lebanese christian. This white thing I think it refers to Westerners, that is Anglo Saxon, Scandinavian, Finnish, french, Spanish (Catalan) because easterners and westerners look really different at least for me. and of course the ashkenazi in Israel, the very light skin, blue eyes type are not really jewish by blood.

Would there even be a map of “white” people, or diverse racial classifications if Africans were not forcibly removed from their native lands, tied up in chains and made to produce free labor elsewhere in many parts of the western world??

Another question.

If Africans are no longer being made to work for free by “whites,” why on Earth are they (especially in the USA) still categorizing themselves as “white?”

Very weird definition of white. How can you link race to religion? Have you seen albanians? They are white as sh-t, just like bosniak and lots of Chechen, blond hair with often blue eyes.

Here’s a picture of’em. they are very white. they are whiter than Greeks and Romanians who have a majority of dark hair, darker skin than these guys and I’ve seen algerians who could be taken for white or european.

There ARE some Albanians who look like the children in your link, some Balkan people are pale and blond, but with that one, random photo, you seem to be suggesting that that appearance is “representative”of what Albanians really look like.
But it’s not really the whole picture is it? Some, or many, are very blond, true, but some are unmistakably “dark”. I am amazed you didn’t notice that, too, only their whiteness.
Why would you do that?

I wonder whether YOUR definition could be weirder than Abagond’s!

Over many, many generations, didn’t some Albanians intermarry with darker Balkan neighsbours, like Serbs, and Greeks? Or is that a fallacy?
What about the Turks in Albania?
Also, I heard that the (Ottoman) Turks had African men in their military, and African women as concubines in their homes, and this could explain why some (*cough*) supposedly “white” people in South East Europe don’t look all that white.
Take a fairly well-known person like Rita Ora, a child of Albanian parents, who is often mistaken for black or at least mixed race: http://shrani.si/f/3q/fc/RppDesI/46469.jpg

Come to think of it, I can think of a few more fairly well-known Albanians who would certainly be considered “dark”, rather than blond.
*

And, then you mention Chechens, who are also mostly “white as s**t … blond hair with often blue eyes…”

Well. I don’t think all ethnic Russians would agree with you at all, because some have, or had, a tendency to refer to people from the Caucasus region (and southern Russia) as “black”! That’s due to the common “dark” appearance of those people … Is thatperception also “weird”?
Perhaps they Russians perceive them as ASIAN, rather than anything else..?
I don’t know.

Of course there are pale skin and light eye and hair colours among these different groups of people, but I have to wonder about your generalisation, because it absolutely depends on who is doing the looking.

Thanks abagond. I don’t know what whites would do if they didn’t have racist negros to tell them who is and isn’t white. Though I don’t think I can take any map seriously that omits people solely on the basis of religion. By that logic someone could change their race simply by changing their religion.

Religion is definitely a social construct, race not so much. But I’m not naive enough to think I could change your beliefs on that any more than I could change someone’s belief on creationism. When you claim race is a social construct you’re actually putting yourself in the creationist camp by denying evolution. Congratulations. You’re a religious nut even if you don’t recognize your belief as religious.

Can you explain how Israel is a “white” country? It seems that this is a common misconception. The Ashkenazi Jews who founded the country are still Jews. They’re still descended from an ancient indigenous population that was exiled from Israel. They have some European admixture genetically, but so do African-Americans. They were never counted as truly white in the European imagination, yet when they return to the land where they have ancient roots, people flip the script on them and claim that they were white Europeans all along. Seems to me that the main reason that people single out Israel is the role of Ashkenazi Jews in founding the country. Had they been brown-skinned Sephardic or Mizrahi Jews, the country would be seen as an organic entity with a right to exist.

Otherwise, the map is pretty interesting, and I really dug the note about Australia being sparsely populated but geographically huge, making it seem much more “white” then it is in terms of raw numbers.

Not at all. If someone is going to deny the evolutionary basis of subspecies by calling it a “social construct” then it’s not much of a leap to deny the evolutionary basis of species by calling it a social construct as well. The difference between the two is merely a matter of degree.

This is interesting and thought provoking. White populations seem to be in decline in all of these places. Aside from Russia and maybe part of Eastern Europe, the primarily white areas seem to have heavy migration of non-whites.

Re: Argentina, white in BA. Not so much in the countryside, even though they might identify as white, they are not treated quite the same.

Yes Jokah, except that the preponderance of opinions do both biologists and geneticists agree that the phenotypic differences that we see within human beings are not actually different “sub species” but that there is only one categorically defined “species” of human.

Only stupid people (like part-time HBD bloggers) think that humans are divided into subspecies by evolution. NO major university on earth teaches this.

@Abagond
“The surprise here is South Africa. I thought at least the Cape would be light blue. Whites are less than 25% in every single province. The way they complained you would think they were like a third of the country. It is galling to see this.”

Congratulations! You now understand how Europeans feel about Africans and Asians in Europe.

the phenotypic differences that we see within human beings are not actually different “sub species” but that there is only one categorically defined “species” of human

Yes, the differences between human populations are clinal, not at the level of subspecies which would require actual DNA differences among all of the individuals between the two populations and no interbreeding between the populations, even though it might be possible. No such phenomenon exists in modern human populations.

ie, there is an evolutionary basis for subspecies, but this does not apply to humans. Any attempt to use subspecies arguments for humans is already specious, not to mention inducing that from differences between species.

would like to see the links to the sources that this spurious line of reasoning is being lifted from.

The surprise here is South Africa. I thought at least the Cape would be light blue. Whites are less than 25% in every single province. The way they complained you would think they were like a third of the country.

S.A.
No, one would not necessarily think that white numbers were large. One would think whites consider themselves large in some sense. It’s common for conqueror peoples to control a much larger conquered populace. You have to smash the people you’re invading initially in whatever way you think will be most effective but after you’ve smashed them you don’t necessarily need large numbers of conquerors to keep watch over the conquered. (British in India as an example, but I think this has been common through history.)

What I’m getting at is whites controlled the economic capital during Apartheid, in that sense they were large and important, putting aside the evil of the regime for a moment. Whites are economically entrenched in S.A., they are still control a lot of capital, it would be on that basis that they would complain as though they are ‘large’ by some metric, and they are.

@ eco

Congratulations! You now understand how Europeans feel about Africans and Asians in Europe.

White is not strictly biological or genetic. There is a cultural component to it. It is not the same thing as “Caucasian”, which goes all the way to the Ganges. For example:

1. When I put Yasmeen Ghauri, 100% Caucasian, on my list of beautiful white women, commenters told me she was not “white” because her father is from Pakistan. Many adjustments later, I found I could just slip in Lebanese or Armenian women on my list, but nothing more. Kim Kardashian (Armenian American) is herself a grey case.

2. The Arab Trader argument. It implies that Arabs are not white. Arabs are the “they” of “They did it too!”, to prove that WHITES are not uniquely evil. No one has ever advanced a Portuguese or Dutch trader argument.

3. No one in the US sees, say, Ralph Nader, Christa McAuliffe or Steve Jobs as anything but white – all of Arab descent. No perpetual foreigner stereotype for them. Americanized Arabs seem to count as white, at least if they are not Muslim.

4. For years and years I have been reading in The Economist about whether Turkey is European. Cyprus is part of the EU, yet all kinds of excuses were made not to let in Turkey, a sturdy NATO ally that is in much better economic shape than, say, Greece. Or Cyprus. It seems to boil down to their being Muslim.

5. The Western prejudice against Muslims, even among scholars, is well-documented. The whole thing about Obama being a Secret Muslim takes such prejudice for granted. Muslim American civil rights are arguably in a worse state than even Black civil rights. They are racially profiled along with Black, Latino and Native Americans.

So, yeah, Muslims in the main are not “white”. They did not take part in the European Expansion. They have been the VICTIMS of Western imperialism. QUITE UNLIKE Israel.

Israeli Jews are as white as sin. It is one of the CRUEL IRONIES of the past hundred years. At Auschwitz they were NOT white. As rulers of one of the most openly racist regimes on earth, complete with US backing, they are white. They put South African whites to shame and that is damn white. The only way Americans can stomach Israel’s crimes is because they share their racism.

The whole point of “white” is to excuse Western crimes – like slavery, genocide (even now, though those things are largely in the past) and theft (of native land, ongoing inequality and imperialism). In the US it is used to blind voters to their class interests.

So your definition of white is dependent on whether or not you see the people as racists and oppressors? US backing? If you dumped a bunch of Israeli Jews in NYC, people would approach them trying to speak to them in Spanish and NOT because they were taken for Spaniards. The cruel irony is that Zionism was created as a bulwark against European racism and is now considered to be of a piece with it.

Your completly right that religion plays a huge part in the cunstruction of whiteness an europeanness. But I would differentiate between religion in general and the religion of an individual or a relativly small minority. Predominantly muslim societies are precieved as non-white, but a muslim of turkish decent in France might not. Because Albanians and Bosniaks are seen as part of the Balkan people (who in general today are regarded as European), they are also seen as European. With Arabs it’s the other way around.

It just seems that for Abagond, “white” is just a catch all for things he doesn’t like. So people of color can become “white” at the flick of a switch if there are considered to be oppressors. Its like what happened to George Zimmerman’s racial identity, only extrapolated across the entire globe.

Because Australia, Siberia, Canada and Argentina are large but thinly settled, the map makes it seem like there are more white people than there are.

I appreciate the point of this post, but I’m still wondering about what you said about Siberia — if you are saying the population doesn’t count (?), then neither should Alaska’s. Siberian cities have bigger populations than Alaskan ones and more than most Canadian ones.

@Bulanik
I should have said “non-european”, not “non-white”. An example for what, the perception of societies or individuals?
On the question why that is. I think it’s down to how we perceive “otherness” and construct our identity. Religion is certainly a very important marker to determine otherness, but it can be “overruled”. So Albania is perceived as “non-european” because of Islam, but as “european” because the whole region is now regarded as mainland Europe.

Even if that were true, reality isn’t determined by a show of hands or by an appeal to authority. But it isn’t true because no such consensus exists. In fact, surveys show that a majority of physical anthropologists acknowledge biological races.

I think it is a matter to be looked upon for all society and not just Abagond. All too often a person who looks to be a poc is argued to be white by certain white men only if said person is a law biding citizen. Once a crime is committed is when they are deemed the other. Great example is during the Zimmerman debacle a white man proudly stated …”of course Zimmerman is not white because he got caught. ” I am sure others will see this statement as they please, but it implies to me that had he not then he would be accepted as the honorary white.

Societies: In the contemporary concept of Europe the borders of Europe are pretty much the ones between Islam and Christianity/former Christianity, with some muslim and orthodox-christian societies with undecided status.
Individual: A native German who converts to Islam is still regarded as german and european. For example we have the converted muslim radical Pierre Vogel who nationalists have called a lunatic, a traitor or terrorst. But I’ve never heard that he was called non-european or non-white.

That’s what I meant in short: A muslim society/people=not european. A muslim person=might be european.

[…] The map of white people was not on the Internet, so I made one. Conversely, it is a map of people of colour.The map (click on it to enlarge) uses four colours:dark blue: 75% to 100% whitemedium blue: 50% to 75% whitelight blue: 25% to 50% whitegrey: 0% to 25% whiteSo:majority POC: grey and light bluemajority white: medium and dark bluemultiracial: light and medium blue […]

Your definition of white is very bizarre.
The “dark” ethnic Albanians are no darker than southern Italians, who are classified as white and colonized a bit of Africa. They’re still very western looking and have been in Europe for a very long time.

Again- I find it a bit amazing that people somehow link religion with a race. This is one of the dumbest, most ignorant ideas I’ve ever heard of. There are many white Muslims. Chechens, Bulgarian Pomaks, Bosnians, Albanians. I enjoyed this map until that fact ruined it.

My god haven’t y’all seen Malcolm X?
Remember the scene where he goes to Meccas and realizes Muslims are of all colors and changes his views on humanity completely ?

But you seem to be saying religious conversion will racialize someone.
It doesn’t work the other way either: if Muslim and renounce their faith, it will not suddenly make them Another Ethnicity that they weren’t in the first place.

Are you serious when you say the borders of Europe are now cut depending on where Christianity ends and Islam begins? As if it were so clear cut! Religion is only one cause of division in Europe.

And, whatever happened to secularism in Europe?
I was under the impression that the separation of Church and State was not a contemporary thing but went back a few hundred years…
*
However, what I was curious about was this:

…Predominantly muslim societies are precieved as non-{European}, but a muslim of turkish decent in France might not.

You mean compared to Arabs?
What do you mean: I am trying to understand your point.
From what I know of Turks in France, this percepton would not generally be so (beyond the French republican ideal of citzenship).

Sure. I think Abagond experienced a feeling a lot of Europeans know very well. It’s being irritated by non-native minority groups who don’t seem to be aware how insignificant they really are, and are responsible for an amount of whining that’s completely disproportional to their deserved role in society.

The obvious difference is that the white South Africans whined about losing power they did not deserve to have to begin with, and Africans and Asians in Europe tend to whine about not being able to gain the power and privileges they do not deserve, because of their numbers and non-native status. By “power and privileges” I mean political representation, wealth, representation in popular culture and the media, religious and cultural freedoms, etc.

Large segments of both, white South Africans and Africans and Asians in Europe, seem to think that for some reason the native population should adjust itself to them and consider the non-native voices as at least as equally important as their own when it comes to national matters.

@Abagond

“Huh? In what European country are only Africans or Asians allowed to vote and own most of the country’s wealth?”

That’s not the kind of analogy I was making. I see how my previous comment was vague, but I think I explained my point of view in this one.

The only reason I had to post on this article as well, is to simply say:
Stop spreading your hatred of white people on the internet.

If we met in person, I am sure you would like me very much; I am extremely friendly funny and attractive (at least I think I am). I am trying to humanize myself, rather then hiding behind a computer screen. So please, do the same and have so god damn faith in humanity.

I guess I’m trolling a bit, because I know this kind of stuff is inflammatory and I intentionally used a few completely unsubtle phrases, but overall I’m serious. I genuinely think native people should be privileged over non-natives. Even over non-native citizens. It seems to me that true, perfect equality is unobtainable and of all possible solutions, that allow geographically distant cultures to coexist peacefully, favoring natives is the least of all evils.

What is native people? Descendent of indigenous peoples, the people that got there first?

How do we handle a place like Hawaii? or Mauritius?

What’s more, many of the descendants of the non-native people may be so ethnically or racially complicated that they have no other place to “return” to. Where do the Cape Coloureds in S.A. or the Singaporean Eurasian call home?

From loads of experience, I’ve found that people who make the “Nothing is perfect!” argument (like for racial equality) don’t really care about equality at all. It’s just a lazy, rhetorical deflection tactic they use to paint any effort at civilization as tautologically futile. Why? Well, I just said. They don’t care.

I agree with eco’s argument, though, that natives should be favored over non-natives. Whites who don’t live in Europe can start by not complaining about minorities when they keep snapping up the lion’s share of success at nonwhites’ expense. And yes, I was being facetious. All of a sudden, equality starts to sound more favorable to non-European whites.

It is really ilogical to classify Greeks, Bulgarians, Serbians, Armenians and Georgians as “white”, while considering Chechens, Daghestanis, Azeris, Albanians, Kosovars, Bosnians, Turks(of Turkey) as “non white”. All these people and some other, as Kurds, Lebanese and also many Afghans, Iranians, Tajiks, Pamiris etc. are best considered as “darker Europoids”. In Russia they are often called “people of Caucasian appearance” and distinguished both from white Slavs as well as from Mongoloids ar Blacks. Although some of people of these nationalities may look as central Europeans.

You’re only trolling if your insincere. You are serious about this view of yours though. Actually Eco, it’s quite an interesting view (and has quite an air of danger to it).

I genuinely think native people should be privileged over non-natives. Even over non-native citizens.

Wow!

Well you can think/feel that but it’s not a sound view. Putting aside the issue of fairness, your view simply isn’t sound. It’s a recipe for immigrant criminal underclasses and a vicious circle of incarcerating the “ungrateful” immigrants, because they should be overjoyed to live in a society that locks them into 2nd class status.

I don’t believe that immigrants should be permitted to over turn the cultures of their new home countries through political power plays. Cultural change should take place organically, I think.
————————————————- It seems to me that true, perfect equality is unobtainable and of all possible solutions, that allow geographically distant cultures to coexist peacefully, favoring natives is the least of all evils.

^That is a statement about protecting something. What is it you want to protect? Culture?

“Arabs” would be very difficult to classify according to race, some of them in Sudan or Mauritania, are definitely black, some as in Lebanon or Syria – most likely white, while North Africans, including Egyptians, are probably of mixed race there are plenty people there who are not white by any criteria, but some may look as Southern Europoids.

In Russia there are some nuances related to race. A person, who has a Caucasian appearance and, let’s say, partially Georgian ancestors, but who is Russian in language, culture and upbringing, would be considered nevertheless a Slav and European, not a Caucasian by people who know him. He however could be taken as a Caucasian by strangers in the street and even hurled racial insults against him, especially in times when there are tensions between Slavic Russians and “Caucasians”, however these people if becoming aware that he is a Russian, would treat him as Russian and probably even apologize for taking him as Caucasian.

Ethnic Russians with Asiatic admixture(there are quite a few of such especially in Siberia would be mostly also considered as Slav Europeans, especially if the admixture of asiatic features is not too much.

Right, Siberia has more people than Canada and way more than Alaska. I scaled the last map, though, by region, not by country or state. So Canada and Argentina got scaled with their continents. They would each be about the size of Oceania or Siberia if scaled on their own. To scale the map at the country or state level I would need one of those cartogram programs.

About giving native born citizens more privileges:
While naturalized citizens should have most of the rights of the native born – they (immigrants) should have to change their culture and language to fit in with the country they move to, not the other way around.

Poland never aspired having colonies overseas. In 16-18, Poland, or more exactly Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth ruled vast territories in the East Europe, comprising modern Lithuania, Belarus and much of Ukraine. However in the end of 18 century weakened Poland was partitioned between three large empires – Russia, Prussia and Austria. It reemerged as souvereign state only in November 1918 only to be again partitioned by Communist Russia and Nazi Germany in 1939. In 1945 it reemerged again this time as a puppet state of the Communist Empire and finally became a truly souvereign state in 1989-1991.

In the September session of 1937 of the League of Nations, didn’t Poland demand colonies? I also recollect hearing that in the same era, wasn’t there some kind of treaty signed between Liberia and Poland (which favoured Poland), and didn’t Poles try to settle there?

Congratulations! You now understand how Europeans feel about Africans and Asians in Europe.

Here we go again. Is it me, or does it seem like whites are scrambling to find any hint of being the victim of reverse racism? Instead of self-reflections, they prefer to have the tables turned, not to learn how it feels like to be the “other”, but to condemn nonwhites.

In Polish and Liothuanian history these attempt played extremely marginal role. Both Polish and Lithuanian nobles were of continental not of seafaring mentality, they were interested in the lands in East.

As for colonies in period before 1939, not only Poland ranted about colonies, but even in Lithuania, a country with just 2,5 millions of population some people had dreams about establishing a Lithuanian colony in Africa:) A professor of Kaunas university Pakštas even made a travel to Africa in order to look for places where Lithuanians could settle:) He described his impressions in the book “from Kaunas to Kapstadt”(Nuo Kauno iki Kapstadt’o). I have read this book long ago, but I remember the passage where professor described the Portuguese colonizators in Angola with deep admiration for the “civilizational work” which they have made.

“What is native people? Descendent of indigenous peoples, the people that got there first? (…)”

I’m talking about something I consider a general ideal, not a precise rule that should be enforced globally. I have no desire to tell nations, ethnic/cultural groups other than my own how they should live their lives and who they should see as one of their own.

I think of nativity the way I think of race. It’s not a real, material thing. In a lot of ways it’s a social construct. The concept of nativity does break down in many contexts. You are absolutely right about that. BUT! So does race. I’m aware of the limitations of the term “native” as much as I’m aware of the limitations of “race”. I think it’s as reasonable to talk about a land’s native people as it’s reasonable to talk about its black or white population.

@Kiwi

“I’ve found that people who make the ‘Nothing is perfect!’ argument (like for racial equality) don’t really care about equality at all. It’s just a lazy, rhetorical deflection tactic they use to paint any effort at civilization as tautologically futile. Why? Well, I just said. They don’t care.”

It’s not lazy. It’s selfish and cynical. It’s not about not wanting to do the work. It’s about recognizing that if you are a native, a member of a dominating majority, multiculturalism is not going to benefit you. Since it requires mutual compromises you can only lose because of it. So why should you want to do it?

@Legion

“It’s a recipe for immigrant criminal underclasses and a vicious circle of incarcerating the ‘ungrateful’ immigrants, because they should be overjoyed to live in a society that locks them into 2nd class status. ”

True, but that’s pretty much what’s happening in the supposedly multicultural societies, isn’t it? Somebody is always getting the short end of the stick, some group always needs to be the underclass. I think it’s ultimately a choice between glass and concrete ceilings.

“That is a statement about protecting something. What is it you want to protect? Culture?”

Yeah, that’s accurate, but I’ll phrase it in a more general way – it’s about the groups’ right to self-determination.
You said that “cultural change should take place organically”, I’m taking it further – I think the initiative to change should only come from within. In the case of the native/non-native dynamic, natives are not required to do anything, not required to make any concessions. Why should they be?

Based on that principle I wouldn’t support the white South Africans’ right to vote. They have no right to tell the native people what the natives should do with their country. Unless, of course, the natives decide on their own to expand the non-natives’ rights. I apply that reasoning whenever it makes sense to speak of nativity.

@Legion

“I still can’t take his comments on the ‘white American music thread’ seriously.”

That’s what I don’t get. If you want to make the argument that the Jews went from Auschwitz to apartheid, I can see the argument. I’m not in total agreement, but I can see your argument. I just don’t get where the white racial categorization comes in. It seems to me that your argument is that:

1. In 1943, the European Jews were subject to racist policies backed by a mighty Western war machine.

and

2. Today, Israelis are subjecting another people to racist policies backed by a mighty Western war machine.

But, I don’t get what the relationship is between that argument, and race, which I see as an extension of how a person looks. I mean, blacks were oppressed by the West for many years, but now the foremost Western military power is headed by a black man who has taken unprecedented liberties with regard to war powers, allowing himself the right to take out anyone, anywhere for any reason. He also authorized the NSA to scoop up enough information to make George Bush II seethe with envy. But he’s still black. Because he looks black and the USA has a one-drop rule. He didn’t become white when he attained massive institutional power.

As a side note, there is a popular French singer named Enrico Macias. The guy would certainly be considered to be a man of color in the USA. He is a Sephardic Jew who was exiled from his native Algeria upon that nation’s independence in 1962. He was never invited back to Algeria, or to any Arab country, for that matter, because he has always expressed staunch solidarity with the Jewish state over the years. This year he announced that, after having spent half a century in France, he would be moving to Israel full time and taking up citizenship there. I don’t think that at the tender age of 75, his racial identity will change based on his new citizenship.

To illustrate my point regarding Macias, here he is in 1973 singing “Hava Nagila” with Charles Aznavour, another great French chansonnier. He’s stylin’ in that purple suit! I put this comment separately, lest it get snagged in moderation. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QTRS3oB4b6s)

and to spell it out if you aren’t with me so far as the song goes, it would tend to suggest a support for a ‘judeo-christian’, american is a christian nation ‘partnership’, thank god they didn’t take out the reactor in iran

i’m still unclear on where abagond comes down on north african/arab/semitic as ‘white’ persuant to the “sub-saharan africa thread,” i guess it would fall under what i understand his preference to 3 race only theory, as previously stated; however north africa and ‘the middle east’ are grey in this picture so i am totally confused on that one.

Ideas like “race”, “white”. “black”, “savage”, etc, are largely a side effect of Western imperialism. Whiteness comes from the barrel of a gun. The idea that it comes from physical appearance and biology is a self-serving fairy tale used to make Western crimes seem inevitable, acceptable, part of the natural order of things, to make racial inequality seem “just”. I have read enough ancient Greek history to know that racism and the racist status quo are hardly “natural” or some kind of inevitable outcome, to know that it is excuse-making for those in power.

In 1943 Jews were at the “wrong” side of that gun barrel. Now they are on the other side, going above and beyond the call of duty as hired guns for the US. They have ordered their society in a racist fashion, almost like a mini US where Palestinians play the part of Blacks and Natives rolled into one. They even have the Manifest Destiny thing down: that they have a God-given right to other people’s land, people whom they dehumanize and massacre. On top of all that, Jews are accepted as white in the US.

Archaeologists will see Israel as an extension of North American society, as part of the European Expansion, Why would they not?

[No, not at all gatobranco1. It’s not something I “had in mind”.
As King says: we are aware of the history.

Saying “it was the times”, or colonialisation was merely a fashion in the olden days, or “extremely marginal”, is an OPINION — and changes nothing.]

I just wanted to say that all these attempts at “colonialism” from the side of Polish or Lithuanians or Duchy of Courland or maybe also Czechs, Hungarians or Lichtensteinians(who knows:))) are rather comedy and farce:)) 99.99% of the people in these countries knew nothing about any colonial plans:)

Perhaps the only book that the most Polish knew anything at all about Africa and other far away countries was the book of the author Henryk Sienkiewicz “In Desert and Wilderness”(W pustyni i puszczy) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_Desert_and_Wilderness about two white children who succeed in escaping during the rebellion of Sudanese Mahdi, and have to pass through unexplored parts of Africa. The book is full of stereotypes about Africans prevalent in the 19 century Europe. Sienkiewicz apparently never visited Africa, he took his “wisdom” from descriptions of French and British colonialists.

As regards Brasil, in the 30ies of 20 century Brasilian government indeed had concerns that some of European nations may use their immigrant communities in Brasil in order to carve up colonies. Poland apparently was one of the states that caused concern for Brasilians, but of course the source of the most concern was Germany and Italy, since these nations had more potential, obviously strived for colonies in other parts of the world and had quite large imigrant communities in Brasil.

Besides that the most of Brasilians were quite unsatisfied that German, Italian, Polish and other immigrants do not want integrate in the Brasilian society, but instead strive at maintaining their own closed communities, their own language and culture, their own schools, press, churches etc. Besides, many of these immigrants even in the second and even third generation did not speak Portuguese or spoke very little, especially in rural areas. In 1937 the President Getulio Vargas adopted stringent laws that closed all immigrant political and cultural organizations and even banished speaking in public other languages than Portuguese. After stepping down of Vargas in 1945 these laws were repealed, however they have intiated swifter assimilation of imigrant communities into Brasilian mainstream.

It is not quite correct say that in 1941-45 Jews were killed by German Nazis because they were viewed as “non-white”. German Nazis had more complex racial hierarchy than just “white-nonwhite”. The highest group was not just “white”, but “Nordic”, Germanic” or Aryan”. Jews obviously were at the lowest rung of the hierarchy, Black African on the second lowest, yet the Slavs – Polish and Russians especially(who are “white” by any standards) – were also viewed as “Untermenschen”(subhumans), not very much better than Jews or Blacks. However Nazis had much higher regards for some other Slavic peoples, such as Slovaks and Croatians, as well as for Turkic and Iranic peoples. Asiatic Japanese were allies of Nazis in the WWII.

As for Israeli Jews after 1948, I think your assessment is largely correct. There indeed is much resemblance in the racist mentality of WASP and Israelis, and this hardly surprising since the racism of both stems from the same source – the Old Testament of the Bible, which is full of the stories of racial exclusion and genocide. Catholic nations read much less of the Bible in former centuries, and if they read it was the most often the New Testament, not the Old. This situation had its reflection in the fact that the racism of Spanish, Portuguese of French, which certainly existed, was nevertheless more attenuated, less exclusionary and segregationist, that that of White Anglos, Dutch Afrikaaners or Israelis. E.g. if I am not mistaken there was no “one drop rule” in French Louisiana, and “quarterons” were often accepted as whites or at least there was no stigma on intermarriage.

I wonder why you do not see muslims as “white” when there are hundreds of thousands of “racially” white muslims in Europe. Bosniaks, albanians etc. consider themselves as whites in racial sense. Is your view based on the fact that you do not see arabs as pure whites, regardless what they think about themselves and thus all muslims are not white, or is this american view on the subject? I personally would not class anybody racially based on their religious views or beliefs. There are hundreds of million africans who are christians who are in racial cathegories clearly black and yet if there ever was a “white european” religion it is christianity.

Siberia seems to be a bit of mystery for most of the people. Usually its colonization by the russian is linked on race too but reality is something else. There were white natives in western parts of Siberia millenias before the first russians. Starting from the west of Urals, the people called Ves/Vepsä lived in the east from the White Sea and Lake Ladoga and they were white finnourgic people. The bjarmians who also lived on the west from the Urals were also white etc.

Also the hungarians came from the Urals as late as 800’s and they too are of finnougric stock. They migrated to their present day Hungary in early 800’s and lived nomadic life on the present day Ukraine much of the early part of 800’s. And they too are white as can be.

The northern parts of the present day Russia were also lands of other finnougric people, the Murom, Mari, Meretsh etc. The söavic tribes migrated to that region only from 700’s onwards. So the native population of the western half of the Siberia was white by the usual racial definitions from as long as can be traced.

Also the Saami/Sami people of Lapland are white by the usual racial definitions and yet they are natives of the whole Fennoscandia region.

All of these native peoples of the north east and Siberia were colonized and some even wiped out from existence by the new comers from the west. This happened also in Prussia in medieval times where some of the native people were completely wiped out by the germans and other invaders.

All of which also show that racial definitions are a huge load of BS and, just like you say, based on the economics, exploitation and colonization by white minority.

I think that you do not orient very well in geography:) The ugrofinnic people people that you have mentioned – Vepsä, Permians, Murom, Mari, Meshchera have never lived in Siberia, they lived in the European part of modern Russia. The Vepsä inhabited areas near the lake Laattokka, for example, are quite close to St. Petersburg and to Finnish border which is quite a way to go from Sibiria:))

Siberia as it is usually defined as land to the east of Urals. I strongly doubt if peoples who lived to the East of Urals – Siberian Tatars, Khanty, Mansi – were “white”.

Concerning Hungarians, the most of modern day Hungarians are not the descendants of Magyar Onogur tribes, but rather of Slavs that Magyars found on arrival and Germans that settled in Hungary later. Perhaps it would be quite difficult tell to which racial group ancient Magyars belonged, the origin of their language – Ugro-Finic or Turkic is also not very clear although many scholar classify them as Ugro-Finic.

As for the population of Sibiria proper, the indigenous people belong to several groups as Samoyed(as Nenets, Enets, Nganasan, Selkup – partly also in European part of Russia as well), Khanty-Mansi(condidered as “ugro-finic” yet theIr language has very little similarity with either Finnish or Hungarian), Turkic(Siberian Tatars, Altai, Tuva, Khakas, Saha Yakut, Dolgan). Mongolic(Buryat), Tungusic(Even, Evenki, Nanai, Oroch, Oroqen) and so-called “Paleoasiatic” not a single group but including several unrelated groups(Chukchi-Koryak, Nivkh, Ket, Yukagir)

I think that racially almost all these groups were Asiatic(Mongoloid).

Most of the population of Siberia today speak Russian and identify as Russians and Slavs. Since there was neither “one drop rule” nor ban on miscegenation in Russia, many of Russians in Siberia have admixture of Asiatic(Mongoloid) blood in their veins. Many indigenous people today are also speakers of Russian, the local languages with the most speakers are Buryat, Saha-Yakut, Khakass, Tuva, Siberian Tatar. Everyone is bilingual in Russian as well.

So it is extremely hard for me to buy this idea of “white” as strictly genetic or just a matter of objective physical appearance. If it were that clear-cut or objective, I should be able to easily tell the difference.

Ann Curry looks like Filipina, definitely not white, Paula Abdul like Latina or Filipino Mestiza, Patricia Ford, Yasmeen Ghauri, Maya Rudolph, Bipasha Basu and Kim Kardashian would appear rather like Iranic(Iranian/Tajik/Afghan) or Caucasoid(Azeri/Georgian/Armenian/Chechen) although they could also be taken as Mediterranian(Italian/Spanish/Greek), but probably not as truly Central Europeans.

Nevertheless none of them(except Ann Curry) would look very out of place in the street of a Russian, Polish, Czech, Hungarian or Lithuanian city

For other ladies whom you call definitely “white” it is difficult to say, but all of them are rather of Mediterranian type, some may also look as Tajik/Iranian. Megan Fox has in this picture eyebrows made up as Tajik ladies do, but otherwise she looks more like Spanish senorita.

You indeed are right that it is not always easy to determine “whiteness” according only to looks, especially for the people who are born in Mediterranian/Middle East/Central Asia however religion(Christian or Muslim) is also a poor criterium, since there are lots of Muslims, especially in Bosnia, Albania, Kosovo and Turkey who look definitely white, even like Central European. Probably the best thing is to accept that not everyone can be neatly and easily classified as white or non-white.

@gatobranco:
Thanks for reply. However your definition of Siberia is, typically, quite limited. As for the finnourgic people, such as the Vepsäläiset and others, they lived way up east.

The area west from Urals is known as West Siberia, but granted, not very widely known fact. Actually, geographically, the whole Finland belongs to the western Siberia, but if we feel to be picky, then the whole land mass east from the White Sea is Siberia.

The hungarians of present day are mixed. naturally, but their original home is in Urals. So the white hungarians originated from Siberia.

I understand that it is very hard to realise that there is whole multitude of white natives anywhere outside the west european area, but so it is. Siberia included.

Yes, in east Siberia the natives are more asian BUT still many of them belong the peoples who speak uralian languages.

I thought of using both linguistics and genetics to define “white”. The trouble is that, either way, Iran, Pakistan and much of India would become part of “white”. That was not the sort of white I had in mind. Linguistics would also leave out Finland and Hungary – or, if I included Uralic languages, I would also have to let in all Indo-European languages, which would again bring in India. Religion fell much closer to the fault lines that defined the sort of people I had in mind. I am not saying it is perfect, but is a better approximation than the alternatives I could think of.

I just wanted to say that all these attempts at “colonialism” from the side of Polish or Lithuanians or Duchy of Courland or maybe also Czechs, Hungarians or Lichtensteinians(who knows:))) are rather comedy and farce:)) 99.99% of the people in these countries knew nothing about any colonial plans:)

Perhaps the only book that the most Polish knew anything at all about Africa and other far away countries was the book of the author Henryk Sienkiewicz “In Desert and Wilderness”(W pustyni i puszczy)

Haha. 😀
I’ve heard of this book as well! 😀 Also “Murzynek Bambo” (“Bamboo, the little black child”), a poem of some charm — but how does this makes any difference to the argument?

You see, as farcical as you think Polish attempts at colonisation were, I’m not sure if your reading of European histories has caused you to consider the links between imagination and ideology… Those harmless, if stereotypical references to darker, foreign people from faraway places, can, at times, utlimately lead to “civilizing missions” by even well-meaning Europeans.
You only have to look at the example of India and the emergence of the British in that country to realize that.
(*Amal Chatterjee’s “Creation of India in the Colonial Imagination” explains the the early colonial ideas about the “exotic East” which later led to “primitive subject nation” perceptions.)

When you said the Poles never aspired to be colonialists, it was clearly not so.

From what Taras Hunczak says about Poland’s colonial ambitions, they weren’t, at one time, as “extremely” marginal about it at all. I had to smile at the irony of this, as Poland and other Eastern Slavs were perceived as “Kolonie” (colonies) by Germany who settled in those territories for centuries…

I don’t mean to say that the facts you provide aren’t insightful.
However, your analysis of “extreme” marginality simply isn’t supported.
A government’s decision to colonize other places is not arrived at from dubious and derivative ideas in children’s books alone.

Interestingly, this map labels Greece, Israel, and South Africa as Western countries. I remembered seeing it some years before and this post reminded me of it. Methinks the decision by the creator to include those countries under the umbrella of Western civilization is politically motivated.

I have never seen other people on the earth so “racially aware” as North-American White Anglos or WASP, with such obsession on “whiteness”. For the most peoples of Central and Eastern Europe “whiteness” is maybe important however it is ethnical origin that matters the most.

For the most of Muslim peoples the issue whether they are “white” or “non-white” is rather non-issue at all. The most important thing is whether one is Muslim or not. Muslims classify people not according to race, real or presumed, but according to religion.

Many Muslims were pround of their ancestry, whether Arabic, Turkic, Kurdish or Iranian, yet what really mattered to them was the ancestry only from paternal side, not from maternal. Whether their mothers were free Muslim women or slave concubines of African, Asiatic or European origin(Sharia allowed for free Muslim men 4 free spouses and illimited number of concubines), the progeny were free if their father was free and had the same inheritance rights according to Sharia and could inherit father’s property, quite differently to the situation of the children of white slaveholders and their black concubines in the North America.

A very important point is that slavery was not racialized in the Muslim world, their were slaves of almost all races and nations in Muslim lands. Arabic or Swahili slave traders brought black slaves from Africa, while Crimean Tatars sold their Polish, Ukrainian ans Russian captives. Other traders could by bringing slaves from Asiatic countries.

Emancipated slaves were given the same rights under Sharia like free Muslim people and they sometimes could rise very high in the social hierarchy, sometime becoming even viziers and rulers. For example, Egypt was run quite a long time by ex-slave sultans of Turkic Qipchak or Circassian origin.

Because of all that there is much less racial awareness among Muslims, and I suppose that Muslim emigrants asked about race, prefer to answer that they not white and black or asian or something of that kind, but are just “Muslims” or “Turks” or “Arabs” or “Iranians” so creating the impression that “Muslim” is a race.

Indeed if the WASP imagination has constructed several ancestry based races( White, Black, Asian, Pacifical Islander, Native American) and one “race” based on language and culture(Latino) so, according to white Anglos, why it couldn’t be one more “race” based this time on religion? Indeed, an average White Anglo is happy only if he is able to neatly categorize people in “racial” categories. If there are some people who defy such categorization, “whites” feel deep psychological pain and anxiety as if the world were about to collapse:)

For me who live in a country where many women are blonde, and most of the rest are rather “gray”(neither blonde nor dark) rather than dark haired, the most attractive “white” women for me are exactly those who are dark haired, of Spanish/Latino, South Italian, Turkish or Iranian/Tajik type, not very high in stature and rather thick-set. While the beauty standards of Mediterranian, Arabic and Iranian guys are the exact opposite – they are really crazy about tall blonde girls:)

As for “non-white” the most pretty for me are women from Philippines and Congo. This of course does not mean that I consider the ladies from rest of world as ugly:D

Not only Muslims are difficult to classify in the racial optics of White Anglos. Another “hard nut to crack” are Filipinos. There are plenty discussions of the internet the participants of which try to answer deeply philosophical question – whether Filipinos are Asians, Pacific Islanders or Latinos. Sometimes these are questions of white guys, sometime of Flipino Americans who are puzzled by insistant questions of their white neighbors and colleagues about their “race”.

Indeed they are in geographical Asia, have a smattering of Confucian values, but mostly do not look like typical Asians(Chinese, Korean, Japanese); many of Filipinos indeed look similar to Pacific islanders and are remotly related to them linguistically yet Philippines has never been considered a part of Oceania; Filipinos have many Spanish elements in their culture(as Catolicism, musical traditions, many Spanish borrowings in local languages) as well as Spanish surnames, some, especially Filipino Mestizo, can even look like typical Latinos, yet the absolute majority of them speak no word in Spanish but instead Tagalog, Cebuano, Ilokano and some 100 more languages together with English. Really a puzzle for racial classification:))

Well, do not take my word. Check this program. It is a finnish documentary series “Finnougric people in Thirty Days”, part 6: The Mordvans and the Komi, who live in Siberia. I guess even you would admit that the Komi live in Siberia proper, the one even you can accept as Siberia. And you can look yourself if the Komi are “black”, “asian” or what ever, or “white”. They are finnougric nation, have lived in Siberia from times immemorial etc.

Unfortunately, the video does not load but it can be found on you tube as well I’ll see. Kiitos paljon:)

I think I know sufficiently well about finno-ugric people. All they(Komi Zyrian, Komi Permyak, Udmurt, Mari, Erzya, Moksha) except Khanty-Mansi live in the European Russia to the West of Urals, not in Siberia. All finno-ugric people to the West of Urals are white. As for Khanty-Mansi living to the East of Urals, from the pictures I have seen on the net, they appear rather Eurasian but not truly Asiatic/mongoloid. Some even may look white

I have however some doubts whether Khanty and Mansi are truly related to Finns. I have found textbooks of Khanty and Mansi languages on internet. These languages have not a slightest ressemblance with Finnish, but neither they do resemble Hungarian. Finnish and Hungarian does not seem to be related either. There are a dozen Hungarian words which resemble Finnish but there are much more which resemble Turkic or Chuvashian.

Chuvash, a non-ugrofinic people living in European Russia (distantly related to Turkic) are also white. Volga Tatars I tink are also mostly white since most of them are descendant of ancient Bulgars and spoke once a dialact similar to Chuvash before they switched to Qipchaq. Some are of Qipchaq extraction and can have Asiatic features.

Regarding Bulgars there is hypothesis that they once lived in the mountainous area in the Central Asia. Probably the name of the city Falghar(Tajikistan) located on the Turkestan range can be related to the word Bulgar. Later they migrated to the North Caucasus area and from there they went and established north to the Black Sea. In 7 century attacked by Khazars they split into several groups, one of them went to Volga region, another led by Khan Asparukh migratred to South of Danube where they established their own powerful state bud made only minority in it(about 20-30% how it is believed) and later slavicized.

It is difficult to tell what language Bulgars spoke, but probably they were a tribal confederation different tribes of which spoke Turkic or rather proto-Chuvashian, Iranic and remaining maybe Finno-Ugric or Proto-Hungarian languages. However these language(s) are not attested. What remains are only some 200 words in modern Slavic Bulgarian which are believed to be “proto-Bulgarian”.

Anyway it is quite probably that these ancient Bulgars were white, and not mongoloid how it is assumed by some scholars.

Geographical Asia – in the East it includes Philippines and the most of Indonesia, but does not includes New-Guinea island, Melanesia, Micronesia or Polinesia which are considered to be part of Oceania. In the West, geographical Asia’s limits are Urals mountains, Caucasus range, Bosphorus straits, Egean Sea, Suez Channel and Red Sea.

Asia as used for the purposes of sports competitions, UN agencies etc. – sometimes it can include parts of Oceania or Australia/NZ, sometimes not. Turkey, Israel, Armenia, Azerbaijan Republic, Georgia are often included into Europe

Asian as “race” in the USA – it includes chiefly representatives of the peoples of the Confucian culture – Chinese, Japanese, Korean and Vietnamese, but also may include all those peoples who have more or less “mongoloid” appearance(narrower eyes etc.), as Thai, Burmese, Cambodians, Mongolians, Tibetans, Central Asian and Siberian Turkic peoples etc. It can inlude Indonesians and Filipinos as well

Asian as “race” in the Great Britain – in the GB Asian it means Indo-Pakistanis.

“Asian” in the US context = East Asian, but is sometimes extended to include the others as listed by gatobranco.

In Britian, however, East Asians are variously known as Chinese, “Oriental” etc., with the group /racial designation of “Asian” going to South Asians, who in the US are typically referred as Indians or “East Indians”, I have also heard “Gandhi Indians” and “Hindus” (actual religious affiliation notwithstanding) by older folk, as well as a least two derogatory identifiers which I will not list here.

In this same vein West and Southwest Asians in the USare not typically referred to as “Asians” either. They are Middle Easterners or “Arabs”

Not using the identifier “Asian” for US-based Indians and other South Asians is not intended as a snub, just as — and I will assume — no snub is intended for British-based East Asians in the regard of typically assigning South Asians, rather than East Asians, the general and more encompassing designation of just plain “Asian”.

Interesting enough the census qualifies as “white” people “having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, the Middle East, or North Africa. It includes people who indicated their race or races as “White” or wrote in entries such as
Irish, German, Italian, Lebanese, Near Easterner, Arab, or Polish.”

Thus according to the USA census, all Muslims of North Africa, Arab countries, Turkey, Iran, Albania, Bosnia, maybe also from some other countries would be qualified as white. Thus it goes against the popular perception of the US white Anglos(reported by Abagond) that “Muslims are not white”.

More: I deleted your comments about Bulanik’s Polish friends. You are dragging in her private life to smear her. Not cool. I know you think they are imaginary, but you have no way to prove it, at least not on an English-only forum like this one. You will just have to let it go.

Well then the obvious question is are all Muslims of North Africa? If they are not then can you reasonable continue to conclude them as white? Also can white according to USA standards be considered white according to them?

The commonly-understood concepts Asia and its geography have been discussed a few times on this blog, but I feel there’s a bit more to it in the light of reading the recent exchanges about belonging and ethnicity.

Pay it Forward is correct: it IS generally true that in the UK (not for Ireland, though), the term Asian is understood to refer to South Asians.
If someone is of Chinese or Burmese descent, for example, then it’s their particular nationality that will be the identifier instead of the supposedly generic designation “Asian”.

(Perhaps one reason “Asian” became exclusively associated with East Asians was because it was another, more polite way, of saying Mongoloid, the way “Caucasian” became a polite way of saying White…?)

However, it is also my experience that East Asians and Southeast Asians are ALSO encompassed by the term “Asian” in normal conversations.
It is acceptable to call ALL Asians “Asians”, and no one bats an eyelid:
I used to notice this in conversations between and among different Asian ethnicities in England and Scotland.

Therefore, this wouldn’t be an issue of “snubbing”, or exclusion, at all: both East and South Asians see each other as equally and absolutely Asian!
In the UK at least.
Any awkwardness or misunderstanding only seems to arise among Irish, continental Europeans, Americans and Australians who — and I generalise sweepingly now — appear to refuse to see South Asians as Asian. “No”, they will say, “Indians aren’t Asians.”
These same individuals will say South Asians are Arabs or Middle Easterners.
I have also seen and heard East Asians (US and Australia) say that South Asians cannot have the Asian “racial” designation and be called Asians because that term belongs to them.

So, at best — at best — the term “Asian” is inconsistent.
There is no pan-Asian identity.
Personally, I don’t think “Asian” it is a good identifier for Indians, Sri Lankans, Indians, etc. Sure, they are certainly Asian, like Koreans are Asian, but “Asian” is far, far too general, and far, far too unqualified whether it’s applied to Sri Lankans just as much as it is to Koreans.

Ethnicity always develops differently in each country, and this causes international comparisons to be excluding and confusing, uselessly so.
I believe more accurate and specific descriptions would be much more useful for the naming of different Asian peoples.

“gatobranco1,
Thus according to the USA census, all Muslims of North Africa, Arab countries, Turkey, Iran, Albania, Bosnia, maybe also from some other countries would be qualified as white. Thus it goes against the popular perception of the US white Anglos(reported by Abagond) that “Muslims are not white”.”

Linda says,

Gatobranco1, just because the USA census “says so” — does not make it so.

Since Islam is a religion, then that means it encompasses people of different “races” and Ethnicities — just like Christianity

Even the term “Arab” does not mean “White”…. because many people called “Arabs” in north Africa are mixed-race or can be classified as “black”

I think because “race” is political and a social construct developed by white Europeans/American in order to perpetuate their own Agenda’s–

Mostafa Hefny feels he’s been black his whole life. The U.S. government doesn’t agree.

when Mostafa Hefny immigrated to the United States from Egypt in 1978, he didn’t get a say in that decision.

“The US government [interviewer] said, ‘You are now white,”

White” is defined as “a person having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, the Middle East, or North Africa” — which is why the U.S. government classifies Hefny as such.

However, the designation for “Black or African American” applies to “a person having origins in any of the black racial groups of Africa.” According to CBS, Hefny says that he is descended from the Nubians, the ancient group of Egyptians from the northern part of Sudan and southern part of Egypt.

Since the 1980s, CBS reports, Henfy has been fighting to have the U.S. government reclassify him as black, which is how he’s always seen himself.”

believe it or not, not every “Arab” north African denies their black African mixed ancestry.

A census has uses, but it’s only a tool, not Definitive and Exhaustive Truth…just an enumeration method grounded in arbitrary and socially constructed principles, and one that must be ever-open to improvement.

What is indeed strange for me, is that a goverment oficial imposed on Mustafa Hefny a racial label of his own picking instead allowing M. Hefny to autodefine himself. The important point is here is not whether the official classified M. Hefny “correctly” and “incorrectly”, but the mere fact the the official was so arrogant as to better know the racial affiliation of the person than the person himself.

As far I understand from the now existing census rules, in our days, had M. Hefny autodefined as “Arab”, or “Egyptian” he would still be finally classified as “white” but he would also be free to autodefine as “black” if he wished so.

Since it happened in 1979, maybe it was a hangover from old racist times before the Civil Rights Movement when it was usual to establish person’s “race” against his own expressed will and the race was considered as something “objective”, “physical” rather than “social” or “identitary”. I have also heard stories how immigrant people from Europe were forced by officials to identify as “Caucasians” which of course had no sense for them.

I just wanted to ask – whether such forced identification of person’s race still happens today in States?

The US census currently also recognizes people from Indian subcontinent as Asian

Asian
A person having origins in any of the original peoples of the Far East, Southeast Asia, or the Indian Subcontinent, including, for example, Cambodia, China, India, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Pakistan, the Philippine Islands, Thailand, and Vietnam.

So that in the census, the label “Asian” includes Indian Subcontinent, the Confucian countries, the Indo-Buddhist countries(as Sri Lanka, Thailand, Myanmar, Cambodia) and Austronesian countries(Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines). It is not clear whether it also includes Mongolia or Central Asian countries as Kazakstan or Russian Siberia, but since persons now are allowed no to autodefine, so probably persons from these countries could autodefine as Asians.

In “geographical Asia” there are several cultural areas with different cultural identity, certainly there is no pan-Asian identity.

If one take “geographical Asia” one can distinguished numerous regional cultural (rather than “racial”) identities:

There are, of course smaller ethnical groups in many countries who not fit in any of these categories

Although much of what I have wrote seems like religious labels, it is much more cultural than merely religious:

-first, religion strongly affects culture, much more than presumed or imagined “race”;

-secondly Hinduism, Islam, Buddhism is not merely a system of belief, but an integral philosophy establishing a way of life, while Confucianism is not a religion but rather an ethical and philosophical teaching

-thirdly even those persons who are not deeply religious or even not religious at all, the most often they belong to the cultural area they were born, e.g. an atheist born in a Muslim or Hindu country still will be mostly Muslim or Hindu in culture; Many Koreans are Christians yet mostly Confucians in culture.

Concerning the question whether some North Africans are aware of their black ancestry.

In Egypt, it may be true. There are much tensions in Egypt between Upper Egyptians(Saeedi, Nubian) and the more affluent people of the Nile Delta. The former are often stereotypized and marginalized by the latter. Upper Egyptians have darker color of skin, they are poorer, they often do low-paid jobs when they live in Cairo, they have a dialect of Arabic different from the Standard Cairene variety, and different social customs.

On the contrary, Cairo and the Nile Delta always were more affluent, the center of political power and received the most of the migrations of “white” peoples(greeks, romans, arabs, circassians, ottoman turks).

Thus is quite possible that South Egyptians may feel discriminated and this can make them aware of their African roots. It is less likely that Cairo and Delta Egyptians would be mindful of their African heritage, although this is not excluded. The president Gamal Abdel Nasser, for example wanted to become a strong leader not only in the Arabic world, but in the black Africa as well. Did he use any cultural or racial arguments besides purely political? I do not know. Maybe some other knows?

As for Maghrib countries, there are strong ethnical tensions between Maghribi Arabs and Imazighen(Berbers), But as far as I know, Imazighen, who are pre-Arab population there, are not black. Moroccans and Algerians do have, however, admixture of African blood due to the importation of black slaves and contacts with Africa. But I do not know how much they are aware of that.

Much of the elite of these countries are by orgin either Arabs, either (especially in Algeria, Tunis and Libya) descendants of Ottoman janissaries or corsary capitans(Turks or European slaves or refugees by origin). Maghrib countries and their elites also had strong influx of Andalusian Arabs(deported by Spanish from Spain). The latter were mostly arabised Spaniards.

“gatobranco1
As for Maghrib countries, there are strong ethnical tensions between Maghribi Arabs and Imazighen(Berbers), But as far as I know, Imazighen, who are pre-Arab population there, are not black. Moroccans and Algerians do have, however, admixture of African blood due to the importation of black slaves and contacts with Africa. But I do not know how much they are aware of that.”

Linda says,

Gatobranco1, you are quoting alot of westernized versions of “African” history

so I will ask you a question, “was Mansa Musa or Askia Muhammad ” imported black slaves?

you do realize that black Africans lived on the Entire continent of Africa and they did not have to be “imported” as slaves to North Africa in order to “add” to the mixture.

and that the Imazighen(Berbers) are not 1 solitary tribe but they are composed of many different Ethnic tribes based on region.. ie Djerba, Mozabites, Siwa, Riffian (the blonds that every likes to boast about but they do not represent the majority of Berbers), Tauregs, etc

the “Arab” slave trade was not the initial way or the only way that black Africans arrived in North Africa.

“Until recently, some papers suggested that the distribution of the main L haplogroups in North Africa was mainly due to trans-Saharan slave trade.

However in September 2010, a thorough study about Berber mtDNA by Frigi et al. concluded that most of L haplogroups were much older and introduced by an ancient African gene flow around 20,000 years ago.
( haplogroup L is an indigenous black African gene)

The sub-Saharan contribution to northern Africa, starting from the east would have taken place before the Neolithic. The western African contribution to North Africa should have occurred before the Sahara’s formation (15,000 years BP).”

Meaning, black people were already in North Africa before the Maghrebs (Arabs) or Turks arrived.

This is why I mentioned to Abagond that an “Africa” tab is needed — a lot of misconceptions

Imazighen as it is known belongs to the Afroasiatic family of languages, and 5 from 6 of its branches(Chadic, Imazighen, Kushitic, Omotic, Ancient Egyptian) were always located in Africa. Semitic was intially located in Western Asia, semites came to North Africa and Ethiopia later.

With 5 branches of 6 being in Africa, it is inconceivable that the original homeland of the Afro-Asiatic was somewhere else as in Africa. Probably it was somewhere at the lake Chad or in Sudan, and the initial pra-Afro-Aasiatic were with all probability black.

Having migrated from their homeland, they moved north and there subjected to their rule probably some white(?) populations in Maghrib and Egypt. Through the passage of time the black elite in in the North Africa probabably became “whitened” through the intermarriage with white slave girls. I have read somewhere that Egyptian frescos depict Pharaons like black men, and their wives and concubines as white, I do not know if it is true, but it is highly probable.

Probably that the ancestors of Ancient Egyptians or at least their elite came somewhere from Nubia/Sudan since Ancient Nubian cultures display many similarities with Egypt(as building of pyramides).

Another group proceded from Africa to Western Asia where the gave beginning to the Semitic language group.

Later, contacts with the subsaharan Africa never interrupted, despite the desertification of Sahara, so that in all epochs – Carthaginese, Roman. Vandalic, Byzantine, Arab – North Africans traded with the black Africa, not only in slaves of course and the human contacts certainly were not reduced to slave trade alone.

Our results reveal that Berber speakers have a foundational biogeographic root in Africa and that deep African lineages have continued to evolve in supra-Saharan Africa.

Excellent stuff! Thank you for both those links.

The standard story always shows blacks as “slaves” and being moved about, or “freighted” like cattle “introduced” into the bloodline. It’s almost portrayed like it’s the Natural Order, or something eternal and universal!
At best, this leads to a poor understanding…
This story of African gene flow is narrow. If that is not bad enough, it’s also told the wrong way round. 😀
Recent research is showing that the direction is properly trans-Saharan, into Southern Europea and also the Levant (or what used to be known as the Levant, or the Eastern Mediterranean).

As a cultural staple, this idea has been quite self-serving.

On the “How white was ancient Greece” thread, it’s pretty apparent how much the idea of a White World has penetrated the way we are all supposed to “see” many West Eurasians, for example and especially the Greeks, through the White Lens:…The British are invested in the Classics, it is the organizing principle of their white, European intellectual identity. The signature of their civilization, the cornerstone of their education.
The Classics is at the root and “the learned vocabulary of international application.” https://abagond.wordpress.com/2010/03/28/how-white-was-ancient-greece/#comment-193933. Also:

“…similar to the idea that Arabs were a white people who “became” darker by adulteration of their bloodlines. For Greeks, it implies that more Turks moved into Greek lands than the other way round, and that the Greeks themselves started out as uniformly Nordic, blond and blue eyed!
None of this was ever so.

When did the Greeks cease being a people of the Levant?
When did they achieve European-ness and their historic ties with Eastern world get wiped?

The effect though, is clear, because it has white-washed the Ancient Greeks and allowed the West to appropriate this history and culture as its own: from Neoclassiscism in architecture, to literature, the visual arts, theatre, to music…”

There’s no need to “white wash” greeks, berbers or anyone else. This graph is based on data from from The History and Geography of Human Genes by Cavalli-Sforza, Menozzi and Piazza. One interesting thing you’ll notice is that there are four major races, not three, and that northeastern Asians are as close to Caucasians as to southeast Asians. There’s a tendency to lump all Asians together, but they are genetically very different.

Jokah, you supply a graphy and tell me: “…there are four major races, not three, and that northeastern Asians are as close to Caucasians as to southeast Asians. There’s a tendency to lump all Asians together, but they are genetically very different.”

Your graph has nice, primary colours, but where does it say any of that..?

Drivers License, etc. will just have height, weight, hair color, eye color,
on each job application,”Equal Opportunity” regulations state the federal government is required to try and collect stats on job applicants…

“3. Ethnicity (Check One):
Hispanic or Latino –a person of Cuban, Mexican, Puerto Rican, South or Central American, or
other Spanish culture or origin, regardless of race.
Not Hispanic or Latino

“4. Race (Check all that apply):
American Indian or Alaska Native –a person having origins in any of the original
peoples of North or South America (including Central America), and who maintains
tribal affiliation or community attachment.

Asian –a person having origins in any of the original peoples of the Far East, Southeast Asia, or the Indian subcontinent, including, for example, Cambodia, China, India, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Pakistan, the Philippine Islands, Thailand, or Vietnam.

Black or African American –a person having origins in any of the black racial groups of Africa.

Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander –a person having origins in any of the
original peoples of Hawaii, Guam, Samoa, or other Pacific islands.

White –a person having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, the Middle East, or North Africa”

The graph shows the Fst distance between selected populations. Where Fst is the proportion of the total genetic variance contained in a subpopulation (the S subscript) relative to the total genetic variance (the T subscript). Values can range from 0 to 1. High Fst implies a considerable degree of differentiation among populations. As a reference, the horizontal Fst from Japanese to English is 0,1244, And the vertical Fst between Eskimo and West African is 0,2693. But, honestly, a numerical reference isn’t necessary to see relative relatedness. You can just look at it.

Hi Abagond,
Thanks for the map. Very useful. There is so much I could say so I’ll say it in stages.

White European Muslims such as Bosnians and Albanians will be considered white by most Europeans, but not by right-wing extremists who consider them “traitors” for following a non Judaeo-Christian faith. Of course Judaeo-Christianity itself originated from the middle east and Christ (pbuh) was a middle-easterner, that of course is ignored or not registered by the right-wing Stormfront types (Albanians and Bosnians are not allowed to have their own stormfront sub-forums as they are not “white”).

However would the average Bosnian or Albanian Muslim (Albania is 40% officially non-Muslim anway i.e. Orthodox/Catholic etc) be subject to the mistreatment that non-whites are exposed to e.g. discrimination in the work place, “Micro-aggressions” (to use your excellent phrase) that non-whites such as blacks and Asians are exposed to. No.

A large part of American and European white racism is based on how comfortable they feel with the white/non-white in question and a lot of that is how visibly different you are, do you stand out as an eyesore. Bosnians and Albanians do not.

In their general social lives unless they practise Orthodox Islam staunchly Bosnians and Albanians will not have major problems and enjoy white privilege the only exceptions will be far-right groups and also on a geo-political level the “problematic” issue of them being Muslim societies to US policymakers.

This is my first comment and I hope I haven’t been too longwinded and maybe I can share some other observations later on.

I myself am Bangladeshi from the Sylhet province (hence my nick) raised in the UK.

Once again an excellent map which can be utilized by others on the internet for reference purposes.

Is “never” what you were taught in school, or are you only guessing that ALL the black people you have seen are “recent” immigrants?

I am wondering how come you have never heard of Afro-, Mulato or Zambo Argentines. There is quite a lot of information that you can find online that shows your “never” claim is ABSOLUTELY UNTRUE.

***

According to historical accounts, Africans first arrived in Argentina in the late 16th century in the region now called the Rio de la Plata, which includes Buenos Aires, primarily to work in agriculture and as domestic servants. By the late 18th century and early 19th century, black Africans were numerous in parts of Argentina, accounting for up to half the population in some provinces, including Santiago del Estero, Catamarca, Salta and Córdoba.

In Buenos Aires, neighborhoods like Monserrat and San Telmo housed many black slaves, some of whom were engaged in craft-making for their masters. Indeed, blacks accounted for an estimated one-third of the city’s population, according to surveys taken in the early 1800s.

San Telmo still has a visible Afro-Argentine population, apparently, along with Merlo and Ciudad Evita cities…Do you believe that the black (or possibly black) people in these places are ALL Haitians and or African immigrants?

Historians generally attribute two major factors to this sudden “mass disappearance” of black Africans from the country – the deadly war against Paraguay from 1865-1870 (in which thousands of blacks fought on the frontlines for the Argentine military) as well as various other wars; and the onset of yellow fever in Buenos Aires in 1871.

The heavy casualties suffered by black Argentines in military combat created a huge gender gap among the African population – a circumstance that appears to have led black women to mate with whites, further diluting the black population. Many other black Argentines fled to neighboring Brazil and Uruguay, which were viewed as somewhat more hospitable to them.

Some commentators say that this was a deliberate policy to create a South American country without blacks in it:

<blockquote…the president of Argentina from 1868 to 1874, Domingo Faustino Sarmiento, sought to wipe out blacks from the country in a policy of covert genocide through extremely repressive policies (including possibly the forced recruitment of Africans into the army and by forcing blacks to remain in neighborhoods where disease would decimate them in the absence of adequate health care).http://www.ibtimes.com/blackout-how-argentina-eliminated-africans-its-history-conscience-1289381

By 1895, there were reportedly so few blacks left in Argentina that the government did not even bother registering African-descended people in the national census. What does that tell you?

***

And, where did you think Tango came from?
Answer: The blacks of your country, it seems…

well i know that in Argentina were mulatos the same as in Uruguay, but they have disappeared long time ago, unlike in Uruguay where you can see many descents from black slaves, what I was just saying is that since many many years ago this is a country of european immigrants, mostly from Italy and Spain, i remember when this new african people started to came and for us it was quite unusual to see black people in the streets,,

An extract from it says:
“The demographic decline of the Afro-Argentines has variously been attributed to miscegenation, disease and warfare … [and] reclassification of black people as white or mestizo…
Indeed, reclassification has its origins in the early eighteenth century, when the Spanish monarchy instituted a system whereby a subject could purchase certificates of legal ‘‘whiteness’’ called gracias al sacar. … death had less to do with the perceived disappearance of Afro-Argentines than such reclassification, frequently as ‘‘triguen˜os,’’ and cultural prejudices.

These contributed to downplaying the contribution of black people to porten˜o culture and overlooking the patriotism and high level of integration of some black porten˜os..”

There are so many articles that you could fill in the gaps about Afro Argentina.
Take this one — it starts off like this:

The most “European” country of Latin America hides its African origin. Today, 200 years after its founding, it faces the problem of the integration of the excluded and the revision of a monolithic and European discourse.

According to Miriam Gomes, a professor of literature at the University of Buenos Aires, says historians are somewhat to blame for the stereotypes that are so widespread. She says:

“Argentina’s history books have been partly responsible for misinformation regarding Africans in Argentine society, Argentines say there are no blacks here. If you’re looking for traditional African people with very black skin, you won’t find it. African people in Argentina are of mixed heritage.”

And, are you familiar with the “Soy afroargentino/a” (“I am Afro-Argentina/o) campaign from a while back?

I understand how shocking this must be for you.
But no matter how indoctrinated you are, and no matter how much denial you live in, this will not change facts about Argentina nowadays like over 5% of Argentines state they have at least 1 black ancestor, and a further 20% state they do not know whether or not they have any black ancestors….

No matter what fantasy you hold dear, it will not change the African genetic contribution carried by at least 10% of the Argentinian population.
Your scientists have found this. Not me.

It seems impossible that you can know what’s going on in the entire country of Argentina just by looking around, and by recalling your own personal experience.

Argentina may be the most White country in South American, but that does not mean that there was ever a time when NO Blacks were living there. At some point, we all have to rely on the history books (since we can’t be in all places at all times) and those seem to indicate the there were always some Blacks around.

It’s a possibility that Guadalupe Victoria’s perceptions are a natural outcome of long-standing policies which’ve promote her nation as “homogeneously” white.
Perhaps the general population does not see diversity.
Perhaps there is not much sensitivity to it.

Xenophobia among the general population is quite pronounced, if the Argentinian federal government research about that is anything to go by.
It seems that Peruvians and Paraguayans, and Bolivians in particular, are singled out for discrimination in that country.

It is something that we have long understood, that the tendrils of White supremacy wrap themselves all around the world. Your country is but one example. But at least you know and admit the truth. Many here in the U.S. tout the idea that racism towards non-whites (particularly Blacks) around the world is a confirmation of White Supremacy rather than a direct result of its worldwide indoctrination.

we descent primarily from Italians and many fascists came here, we also had a great number of German nazi refugees, we are the second country in the world (after USA) with larger jewish population, so it s not to be surprised of the idiosyncracy of Argentinian people

I think what Guadalupe calls “black” is people who almost literally have “black” skin or are dark brown, to them, that is what “African” represents.

You have to remember, trigueno, mixed, mulatto, etc.. are sometimes not seen as “black” in certain South American countries — reverse one drop rule, mixes that African away.

so her perception of “black” is different than countries like the US or UK’s perception of black.

As you are aware, even in the Caribbean, ambiguous “black” people or known mixed-race history turns their identity to “brown”

I know that perception of my identity changed depending on the country –I’ve been called Samoan, Indian, Puerto Rican, etc — I think there are a few other posters who also underwent this identity change once they left the US to go elsewhere.

@linda u made me laugh! when I say that Argentina is white is because we descent from Europeans, when u talk about mulatos and all that stuff is people from the rest of Latin America, hardly in Argentina u find those peoples, they exist here but is an insignificant pecentage, my perception of “black” is exactly the same as people from UK, and for black we understand all those u mentioned ( trigueño, mixed, mulatos, etc), regards

“Guadalupe Victoria
@linda u made me laugh! when I say that Argentina is white is because we descent from Europeans, when u talk about mulatos and all that stuff is people from the rest of Latin America”

Linda says,

Then why would you be confused about the fact that there are “black” Argentinians that are not recent African immigrants– if you see trigueno and mixed race as “black”?

That means you saw “black” people in Argentina before the arrival of recent black African immigrants. I know “black” Argentines are a smaller percentage than the European immigrant descendants in Argentina but they were still there — how did you manage to miss them?

Thus, most Argentines are descendants of the 19th and 20th century immigrants, with about 97% of the population being of European, or of partial European descent.[3][4] Arab descent is also significant (mostly of Syrian and Lebanese origin), and the Jewish population is the biggest in all Latin America (7th in the world). Mestizo population in Argentina, unlike in other Latin American countries, is very low, as is the Black population after being decimated by diseases and wars in the 19th century, though since the 1990s a new wave of Black immigration is arriving.

I know someone who worked and travelled in Latin America a lot, and she asked some local friends in Argentina why countries like Chile, Argentina, and Uruguay tended to be more economically prosperous than neighboring countries like Bolivia, Paraguay, and Peru. They responded along the lines of, “Oh, well that’s easy. We don’t have any indigenous people!”

I also knew a Venezuelan mestiza girl who seemed ashamed when she mentioned that one of her grandmothers was black and lamented to her white(r) friends about her skin turning darker in the summer sun.

Thank you for reciting Wikipedia’s information for me, Dear… but I can read and use Google just as well as you.

I wanted YOUR opinion –words from YOUR standpoint as an Argentinean, who I assume still lives there, about why you seem to not know the difference between your fellow so called “black” Argentinean countrymen versus the African immigrants….

you did make the statement that there were “Never” any black people in Argentina, and as a Latina, I know that is not true.. how come you did not?

I suggest you do not delete Guadalupe Victoria’s comments. She is a perfect example of the racist attitudes that I highlighted in the Argentinian friends’ views towards indigenas and nonwhites in general. Their view is that other countries are “dirty” because they are “infested” by nonwhite peoples and do not have the “white racial purity” that countries like Argentina have.

White Hispanics in America are very often Mestizo ancestry, however, a good deal of them can pass as white. It’s not a stretch of imagination to say that half the Mestizos in Chile are passably white as well, boosting white people’s numbers in that country.

“dear , 97 % of Argentinians descent from European immigrants,Period.”—-tsk tsk tsk. Why is the sudden rush of people quoting sources and not really reading it. Sorry Guadalupe, but according to your source it is not period as your source continues on to say partial European decent.

I feel like the emphasis Guadalupe Victoria is placing on Uruguay and Chile not being white is that they aren’t “pure” enough to be considered white. It makes sense that she would then call a black person dirty when she also calls countries that are perceived as “infested” by nonwhites dirty.

No one is exempt from comments going into moderation, so basically you are going off on a paranoid rant. Also it is you who provided a source, did not fully read it past what supported you, and opened yourself for me to point it out. Don’t be mad. Just do better.

That depends on what you are considering an insult. If by her questioning you or by you calling her ignorant? In either case I can provide the links to where it began for you to review and determine where it went sour, but I prefer you do that yourself. At any rate I am out.

I’ve encountered situations where a seemingly decent white person would suddenly hurl racial insults at me over non-race related incidents. Those kinds of white people are usually just better at hiding their true feelings about nonwhites.

Maybe Linda wasn’t the nicest she could possibly be to you. Let’s pretend she was really mean to you. But even then, there would still be no reason to call her “perra”, “negra sucia y rastrera”, “ugly nigg´r”, or “negrita”.

You made your views towards blacks crystal clear when you stated, “if i were black i d killed myself”.

Well, once upon a time even finns were not white enough for USA. Heres a bit from Wikipedia:

“The earliest Finnish immigrants, colonialists who were Swedes in the legal sense and perhaps spoke Swedish, and settled in the Swedish colony, were supposed to have assimilated into the British culture quickly.[12] More recent Finns were on several occasions “racially” discriminated[13] and not seen as white, but “Asian”. The reasons for this were the arguments and theories about the Finns originally being of Mongolian instead of “native” European origin due to the Finnish language belonging to the Uralic and not the Indo-European language family.[14]

On January 4, 1908, a trial was held in Minnesota about whether John Svan and several other Finnish immigrants would become naturalized United States citizens or not, as the process only was for “whites” and “blacks” in general, and district prosecutor John Sweet was of the opinion that Finnish immigrants were Mongols. The judge, William A. Cant, later concluded that the Finnish people may have been Mongolian from the beginning, but that the climate they lived in for a long time, and historical Finnish immigration and assimilation of Germanic tribes (Teutons)—which he considered modern “pure Finns” indistinguishable from—had made the Finnish population one of the whitest (fairest) people in Europe. If the Finns had Mongol ancestry, it was distant and diluted. John Svan and the others were made naturalized US citizens, and from that day on, the law forbid treating Finnish immigrants and Americans of Finnish descent as not white.[15][16]

In the beginning of the 20th century, there was a lot resentment from the local American population towards the Finnish settlers because they were seen as having very different customs, and were slow in learning English. Another reason was that many of them had come from the “red” side of Finland, and thus held socialist political views.”

unfortunately, ms guadalupe, doesn’t get it, in the usa most white people would consider her, per federal guidelines of course, racially defined ‘hispanic’, and of late, ethnicity could be ticked off ‘white’ — i am not sure on the history of that particular development of the byzantine categorization process; however, ya latina, that makes it even more twisted, her little rant here, that’s the kind of thing gets your teeth knocked out talking like that in public, but we’re all safe behind our computer screens right?

I deleted every comment by Linda and Guadalupe Victoria from 2:20 onwards and some of Sharina’s too, for use of insulting language and comments not in English. See Kiwi’s comments to get an idea of what went on as it relates to the topic of the post.

Ahh… You’ve taken out all the interesting bits! Now where is the fun in that Abagond? I agree with Kiwi. I’d be interested to know the dirty racial insults a typical white Argentina might feel threatened to use…before it goes in the bin of course!

I think what Guadalupe calls “black” is people who almost literally have “black” skin or are dark brown, to them, that is what “African” represents.

You have to remember, trigueno, mixed, mulatto, etc.. are sometimes not seen as “black” in certain South American countries — reverse one drop rule, mixes that African away.

so her perception of “black” is different than countries like the US or UK’s perception of black.

As you are aware, even in the Caribbean, ambiguous “black” people or known mixed-race history turns their identity to “brown”

I know that perception of my identity changed depending on the country –I’ve been called Samoan, Indian, Puerto Rican, etc — I think there are a few other posters who also underwent this identity change once they left the US to go elsewhere.

Yes, I understand what you mean! 😀
I saw some of this from my Ecuadorian and Colombian foster children in England. Also, because I have family in Florida, I came to hear and see the Hispanic culture there (mostly Cubano of course) in shops, the hairdressers, restaurants, malls… the latinidad.
I quickly got used to their truly ghastly “racial lens”, and got a sense of their blind-spots, the inferiority around white people, desperateness to be white combined with a violent (self)hatred of African blackness and indigenous-Americana. And then because one of the foster children was part-Chinese, that opened up another dimension…

I’d watch sometimes as the Colombianos they socialized with (Calenos at that, from the Caribbean coast!) would spout out that they were “Italian” if someone white asked them what they were. Oh, funny, funny!
Who did they think they were fooling!
Because, the same white people they told would later say to me: “But those people look definitely bit mixed race and Aztec-y..”
Yes, Aztech-y. Haha.
Even the Argentinians we knew didn’t look like “standard white” all the time/ They looked like a hodge-podge of different Europeans, and I would sometimes hear a “dark” Latina say to an Argentinian:
“Too blonde, you are tooooo dark for so much blonde, it looks funny…”
Answer: “My grandmother was German! I can be extra-blonde if I like!”

I know someone who worked and travelled in Latin America a lot, and she asked some local friends in Argentina why countries like Chile, Argentina, and Uruguay tended to be more economically prosperous than neighboring countries like Bolivia, Paraguay, and Peru. They responded along the lines of, “Oh, well that’s easy. We don’t have any indigenous people!”

Hmm, that sounds about right. You will hear this, too:
“Argentina doesn’t have a racism problem, because we don’t have any indigenous or blacks.”

I’m surprised about Argentinians believing that Chile does not lots of indigenous people. But…then again, I am not sure if being informed is a priority among white Argentines, really.
Anyway. Most, but not all, Chileno/a I’ve met are mestizo, even the most “Spaniard-white” looking ones. There was even one apparently white-looking family I met who said they were of recent African descent, too. The mother said that blacks were a minority in Chile, but not as small or insiginificant as publicised, and they had traditionally settled in the far north of the country, at the port of Arica. The Chilean Chinese settled there as well.
(A number of Chilean students, business people, artisst, academics settled in the UK following the Allende/Pinochet political upheavals in Chile, so Chileans are fairly well-known in parts of the UK.)

the Finnish people may have been Mongolian from the beginning, but that the climate they lived in for a long time, and historical Finnish immigration and assimilation of Germanic tribes (Teutons)—which he considered modern “pure Finns” indistinguishable from—had made the Finnish population one of the whitest (fairest) people in Europe…

When I first encountered Finns (in London) they seemed to 2 kinds: ones who were indistinguishable from the the fairest Swedes and others that I can only describe as blond and blue-eyed East Asians. I wasn’t in a hurry to call them “white people”! 😀

I see what you mean that when you said the Swedes regard (or once regardd) the Finnish people as a Mongol nation!

ok you can go to the documents all u like, but the fact is that in Argentina nowadays there s no black people except for the new immigrants

Maybe so, but there are plenty of ‘whites’ with African blood in their veins. Perhaps many are aware of this, maybe many aren’t, maybe you are one of these African descended people? In any case due to white supremacy, many descendants subsumed this part of their heritage.

We began with the statement that there were no Black people in all of Argentina. Or at least, there had not been until very recently in then in very small numbers.

Yet, when the opportunity presented itself, Guadalupe Victoria seemed to have quite a long list of ready-made insults prepared specifically for the very people who (according to her) don’t even exist in her country! Pray tell, who does she use these names on when she’s not on Abagond? And where would she have even heard them enough to have them so readily available?

But then, she did say that a few Africans and Caribbean’s had immigrated to Argentina. But when you look at the numbers in the United states, the Africans and Caribbean self-selecting populations are among the most successful and highly-motivated groups of immigrants in the country, often even outperforming Asians (taken as a single block demographic). So why would she have such degrading names for those kind of people?

This little demonstration gives the lie to the brainless theories floated by Da Jokah and others, that racism is really only a just a reaction to Black dysfunction and pathology. You can clearly see that even in its declared absence, the racism doesn’t miss a beat. 🙂

Looks likely that the particular ideology, racist ideology, of the Argentines was put together by Domingo Faustino Sarmiento.

He was behind the deliberate extermination of the country’s black population and continuing denial of Argentina’s non-white roots.

It seems he laid it all down in his book: “Facundo: Civilization and Barbarism”, from what the Wiki article about the book explains, “it’s a blueprint for modernization, and the dichotomy between savagery and civilization was explained. It doesn’t mentioned the black population, but I believe he already had plans to wipe them out without writing about his intentions to do so.

In linking Europe with civilization, and civilization with education, Sarmiento conveyed an admiration of European culture and civilization which at the same time gave him a sense of dissatisfaction with his own culture, motivating him to drive it towards civilization..

“King
This little demonstration gives the lie to the brainless theories floated by Da Jokah and others, that racism is really only a just a reaction to Black dysfunction and pathology. You can clearly see that even in its declared absence, the racism doesn’t miss a beat.”

Linda says,

Very true… because when I pressed for her to tell me her personal reasons as to “why she did not realize that black people already lived in Argentina” since she said Argentina Never had black people until recently — she became upset and Rude.

(loose translation of what Gaudalupe said to me in Spanish, right after I told her commenting in Spanish was against in blog rules)

“ because black people in Argentina were exterminated! You come from a country with dirty black and mestizo people, that’s why you care –Bye b’tch

She could have said anything like, such as “I come from a small village” or “I don’t consider triguena to be “black” — not a stretch to imagine since Argentina had a trigueno public health minister, Ramón Carilio, who looked white but he admitted his African heritage.

I thought she might have been serious until she started quoting Wikipedia and then became rude — she did not know anything about Argentine history (or Argentina itself) until Bulanik told her — so, as usual, we had another typical white racist troll with an agenda trying to stir up hate.

I think Abagond should have left her response to me in Spanish on the board — it truly showed who she was– and how she felt about black, Amerindian, and mestizo/ mixed-race people

I thought the girl was serious and slightly confused, so I thought I was helping her out with my statement to you… whelp, so much for trying to assist, when it’s just a white racist troll on the prowl.

As for racism in Argentina, I have met many Argentine people who were proud of their “white” European lineage of course, but they don’t think Argentina is any more racist than any other white majority country.

Indeed, Argentina white-washed their history, so I would say most people are ignorant of the historical facts concerning black/African people. I’ve heard about their stereotypes and micro-agressions against dark skinned people.

The term “Cabecita negra” means little black head and this is used against people with “dark” skin and black hair ie Indios or anyone who is considered poor from working class neighborhoods.

From what I understand of the situation, in Buenos Aires, there is definitely a love-hate relationship with the people from Brazil, Paraguay, Peru, Bolivia – many people from these countries move to Buenos Aires for jobs —

so I would say, Argentines are xenophobic against foreigners and there is prejudice against “Indios” (Native Americans), mestizos and stereotypes against black people

and funny enough, they also use the term “Gringo” in a derogatory way against north Americans or English speaking white people.

“In contrast to Mexico, which is self-consciously a synthetically a “mestizo” nation which conceives of itself as a cultural and biological synthesis between European and native, I think it is fair to portray Argentineans as a settler society of Europeans in their self-image. As I have said before, this mythos goes a bit too far.

Since Argentina was a mixed-race society before mass immigration, as long as the roots of any given individual goes back to the period before mass immigration than it is likely that they will have some non-European ancestry.

We investigated the bio-geographic ancestry of Argentineans, and quantified their genetic admixture, analyzing 246 unrelated male individuals from eight provinces of three Argentinean regions

Argentineans carried a large fraction of European genetic heritage in their Y-chromosomal (94.1%) and autosomal (78.5%) DNA, but their mitochondrial gene pool is mostly of Native American ancestry (53.7%); instead, African heritage was small in all three genetic systems (<4%).

The median Argentinean probably has enough indigenous ancestry (Native American Indian) to qualify as a Native American tribal member in the United States by the rules of blood quantum (on the order of 20-25%).

As for the African lineages, the proportions are small, but one could envisage scenarios whereby slave women have mixed-race children, and for whatever reason their sons marry out and reproduce to a greater extent than their daughters. This would eliminate African mtDNA from the population, but maintain the total ancestral contribution"

So apparently, the native Indian and African slaves people went into the Argentinean artery and veins.

The Y chromosome is inherited from the father whereas the mitochondrion is inherited from the mother. This means that, based on your data, almost all Argentinians are descended from white men while most of them are descended from Native American women. That sounds pretty colonial, especially when you take into account the history of white men appropriating nonwhite women’s bodies for their own pleasure (eg: rape of black slaves, Asian fetish). Disgusting.

“We also look at the Y chromosome DNA, which is a history of the male lineage in the family. There are DNA patterns that are specific to Africans: For instance, there’s what we call a Y chromosome alu polymorphism [YAP] that is found just in West Africa, and is definitive for West African ancestry.

But the most interesting thing is, when we look at most African-American men, upwards of thirty five percent of their Y chromosomes don’t go back to Africa; but to Europe!“

THANK YOU for that that last link from about the genetics of Argentina.
Very revealing.

But I wonder, did it go far enough?
In making transnational comparisons, I feel that that link made the same error of RACIAL AMNESIA that seems to plague population assessments of Spanish-speaking South America by totally marginalizing and excluding the black populations, whilst rightly highlighting the contribution of indigenous ancestry in those nations.

It seems to take with one hand, and take away with the other.
For instance, this part:

“In contrast to Mexico, which is self-consciously a synthetically a “mestizo” nation which conceives of itself as a cultural and biological synthesis between European and native, I think it is fair to portray Argentineans as a settler society of Europeans in their self-image. As I have said before, this mythos goes a bit too far…”

Mexico has a known black population of 5%. So, it seems they are obviously outside the cultural and biological synthesis! although it’s well-known that Africans were:
–an essential feature of Mexicos early economic growth,
–worked in urban professions,
–developed and cultivated farmland,
–provided skilled labour in the silver mines,
–workedon cattle ranches and sugar plantations,
–created Jarocho music — made famous throug the song “La Bamba” — all AFRICAN in origin.
Plus, recent studies* have also shown African contributions to cuisine, marriage customs, medical practices, architecture, and language (the Mexican f-verb chingar coming from Angola).

And, if the white-washing trend we have observed throughout the Americas is anything to go by, that 5% of the population could be somewhat higher as many white or mestizo Mexicans do not know they are of Afro-Mexican origin, or do not say they are, leading to the trivilization and denial of African contribution to Spanish-speaking America that we are all too familiar with… (http://www.minorityrights.org/?lid=4455&tmpl=printpage)

Historian Marco Polo Hernández Cuevas sees it differently, and puts the true figure of Mexicans of African-descent at between 55%-85%. He says:

t’s estimated that over 300,000 enslaved Africans were brought to Mexico during the colonial period, producing millions of offspring. Many of the major leaguers of the Mexican liberation movement were black themselves. The last two top commanders of the movement, José María Morelos and Vicente Guerrero, as well as a significant number of other leaders and troops have now been identified as mulattoes pardos.

Even the Spanish conquistadors brought African heritage with them, as descendants of the Iberians and the Moors of northern Africa who occupied Spain during the medieval era, said Hernández. The modern Spanish language still contains over 4,000 Arabic words.

[Mexicans] are African on [their] Spanish side, and African on [their] African side…as much African… as … Amerindian or European…

The Black Virgin — a representation of Virgin Mary with dark skin common throughout Spain, France and Mexico – is one example of African cultural influences….the battle commemorated by the national holiday of Cinco de Mayo was fought by African Mexican “maroons.”

His book describes how Mexican cultural leaders have rejected this African heritage, choosing instead to “whiten” Mexican literature, film and popular culture from 1920 to 1968, a period described as the “cultural phase of the Mexican Revolution.

blockquote> As for the African lineages, the proportions are small, but one could envisage scenarios whereby slave women have mixed-race children, and for whatever reason their sons marry out and reproduce to a greater extent than their daughters. This would eliminate African mtDNA from the population, but maintain the total ancestral contribution”

Whatever reason…this I would like to know! 😀
It just goes to show that although research is at least being done, it is nowhere near complete.
What is the reason for this “Directional mating”? I don’t know if that is the right phrase for it, but it leaves me wondering what happened and how come.
Was the reason some kind of pattern of patrilocality, some unexplained migration, a bottleneck of some kind? It’s almost like the work has only started…

To go back to Uruguay (a country hardly ever, ever mentioned anywhere, lol).
In European accounts of Uruguayan society in the 1800s, a typical family structure was a frequency of Spaniish men and Indigenas with large numbers of children.

Yes, Spanish women were scarce, and European immigrants were overwhelmingly male at the start.
That sounds harmless enough, and makes sense. But, a detail is missing — what about the Indigenous men? It’s easy to skip over that.
In the case of Uruguay, the indigenous men (the Charrua) had indeed been killed off in massacres and the surviving women and children enslaved.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charr%C3%BAa_people

“[…] but one could envisage scenarios whereby slave women have mixed-race children, and for whatever reason their sons marry out and reproduce to a greater extent than their daughters. This would eliminate African mtDNA from the population, but maintain the total ancestral contribution […]”

_ _ _

Yes, this is true as mitochondrial DNA is passed only through the mother to ALL her offspring, whereas Y-DNA is passed only from the father but to his MALE children only (daughters obviously do not have have the Y chromosome, and would have to get that type of genetic info through the DNA testing of their father, a full brother, a paternal uncle or grandfather et cetera).

If, then, men who were mixed race / Black on their maternal side were to reproduce to a greater extent than their own mixed race sisters, and if they reproduced only with white women, it is the mtDNA of those white women which will continuously be passed down in far greater numbers through consequent generations.

African genetic heritage, however, might still remain generations later in the autosomal DNA, and might be revealed through DNA testing, even in trace amounts.

For “whatever reason” in this case basically means that the reason for such an occurrence is unimportant for the purposes of said postulation / suppostion.

In the theory of the Mitochondrial Eve their is the belief that there most probably was other possible mtDNA donors, but for whatever possible reason, their mtDNA was not passed down, leaving only mtDNA Eve’s in evidence.

…when the opportunity presented itself, Guadalupe Victoria seemed to have quite a long list of ready-made insults prepared specifically for the very people who (according to her) don’t even exist in her country! Pray tell, who does she use these names on when she’s not on Abagond? And where would she have even heard them enough to have them so readily available?

And you made this observation:
From what I understand of the situation, in Buenos Aires, there is definitely a love-hate relationship with the people from Brazil, Paraguay, Peru, Bolivia – many people from these countries move to Buenos Aires for jobs —

You’re right about the “love-hate” thing, but Guadalupe was nation-specific about Uruguay. Could it be more than economics? After all the population of Uruguay is small and mostly white. A small country, with a small black population. But for all its smallness, it might be particularly irritating for a reason. Like Argentina, Uruguay is not conventionally thought of as part of the African diaspora, in fact, it’s rarely, if ever, mentioned at all, and ignored.

Back in 1925, the year Uruguay celebrated 100 years of becoming a Republic, El Libro del Centenario del Uruguay went so far as to explicitly deny cultural influence from any group outside of Europe, apparently:
“Uruguay is populated by the white race, totally of European origin.”
That sounds just like something an Argentinian would say…
The 2 countries share a fair bit in common, originally both being part of the Viceroy of Rio de la Plata, with Bueno Aires as the capital city and Uruguay, a province. They share linguistic, cultural and economic ties, not just similar European heritage.

But there are important differences that have struck me after I heard a talk by George Reid Andrews on the national culture of Uruguay>>

Linda, contd:
According to him, at one time : Afro-Uruguayans created the most active (on a per capita basis) black press anywhere in Latin America. Between 1870 and 1950 black journalists and intellectuals published at least 25 newspapers and magazines in Montevideo and other cities. This compares to between 40 and 50 black-oriented periodicals during the same period in Brazil, where the black population is today some 400 times larger than Uruguay’s; and 14 in Cuba (black population twenty times larger than Uruguay’s).

Unlike Argentina, the Uruguayan black population seems to have somehow made its mark on mainstream society one way or another, despite ingrained and widespread anti-black racism in Uruguay. Even under these conditions, the black population were far more literate than their counterparts in Latin America. Who knows, but could they have been comparatively more literate than many white Argentines in comparative social strata at that time?
I don’t whether it’s possible that this makes Afro-Uruguayans appear “uppity” in the eyes of white Argentina.

There is also another difference between Argentina and Uruguay.
George Reid Andrews also says the culture of Afro-Uruguayans has been embraced, body and soul, by the white majority, to the point where “white people get to be black”. Then, as now, they get to immerse themselves in Candombe and Tango, take great pleasure in dressing up and acting out beloved stereotypes about black people’s “nature”, such as natural rhythm, supposed hypersexuality, connection to magic…and, even wear blackface.
It’s so much a part of white Uruguayan national consciousness, he says, that “the white influx into comparsas is now pushing down wages for black drummers”. (comparsa=musical band).
I wonder whether Argentina’s whites long for the privilege of expressing and defining themselves so openly using black artforms?

The author does report that Afro-Uruguayans aren’t best pleased with their racial caricaturisation or what seems like a white obsession with African dance and music as a national expression. It has nothing to undo racial inequality.
However, I can only speculate on how the 2 countries could regard one another.

“Limpieza de sangre” seems to be a common theme in white Latin American racial attitudes, where nonwhites such as Amerindians and Africans are seen as “unclean”. It goes back to Hispanic views of Moriscos (Muslims) and Marranos (Jews) in Iberia during the time of the Spanish Inquisition.

What I find amazing is the striking similarity of Hispanic racism’s origins in Catholic persecution of Jews and Muslims to Anglo racism’s origins in English Protestant persecution of Irish Catholics.

What started as religious persecution that could be avoided by conversion transformed into a persecution based on ancestry. Even “conversos” (converted Jews and Muslims) would face continued discrimination based on their “impure” lineage.

The same applied to Natives and blacks who converted to Christianity. After too many nonwhites became fellow Christians of the English or Spanish, the goalposts were shifted from religion to race, thus keeping people divided.

Concerning Argentina, I have once read a Russian publication about that country where it was claimed that in the end of 18 century about 30 percent of the Agerntinian population of the time(less than 1 million people) could have been black. The rest were mostly Spanish-Native American mestizos, only small group were white(criollos) but probably even these had at least some Native American ancestors. So that Argentina before the beginning of the mass migration of Europeans(somewhere about 1860- 1870) was not really different from other countries of the continent.

Where I live is a huge destination for Argentinians and people from Uruguay , the Argentinians come in bus loads, and their is a season for the Uruguaians..these are more blue collar people the elites go to Rio….

The Uruguaians always have some phenotype black people among them and the Argentinians rarely have phenotype black people .They both have many people with phenotype indiginous indian looks .The Candombe carnival celibrations in Uruguay, have many black neighborhoods drum corps. Uruguay has way more phenotype Afro descendants than Argentina

A person from Argentina, Buenos Aires , who has some Afro descendancy but is not overly phenotype Afro looking , is a guy like soccar player Tevez…he played in Brazil, and they did a back ground bio report on him and they said he came from a poor neighborhood with a violent reputation , and when they showed shots from there, you could see the people were a little darker than average . still no heavy phenotype Afro representation, but , Afro descendant traits . They even went into the origins of his victory dance after his goals and how it was a dance from that neighborhood.

The Tango was influenced by the Cuban Habanera , and they say from Uruguay as well as Argentina…for sure , Uruguay could have an Afro influence on Tango

But Tango has other influences that are stronger than the Afro influence…many times , the flow is interupted by retards, or stops…very anti groove when that happens. It is one example of many in Latin America , where there is some Afro influence, but it is diminished. There are other anomolies in Gaúcho culture that have Afro referances but mostly done by white people. Something done with two hard balls on a rope that they swing very percusivly in 6/8 Afro sounding cadance, and a rhythm they play on a drum called bumbalagueiro

Brazil is so much more Afro descendant. There are huge amounts of dominant Afro diasporic expresions, actualy varying from big city to big city, like they were a country onto themselves…huge varieties of Afro diasporic beats and dances and huge varieties in how mixtures of people in the Americas played out, if not all the examples…fewer workers from Índia were brought to Brazil, where Guyana to the north has lots of people whose ancestors were brought from India

Check out my SocialHandle.WordPress.com on my SocialHumanRace.WordPress.com It is probably Also SocialKin.WordPress.com! You will find the Genographic National Geographic testing shows comparable kinship of JudaeaoGerman,Yiddish Ashkenezim with both Mediterranean JudaeanHebrew,SephardicJews and as comparable with PalestineArabs’ patrilineage! If you want to sharpen up on your Lebanese war material, you might want to check out the Genographics on the Maronites as well as the pages showing each of the countries of the Mid east North African Mediterranean! I advise you to free your mind from the old radical militant affinity to the ArabistEmpireRacist genocidal perps, raping and genocidal destroying of Darfur, Sudan as well as the SudanArab war on South Sudan Blacks, Black lives and Black social culture! That is, as you obsess over the Angloes’ old hat, worn out standard , not new at all, stuff! With the exception of your great 1949 Blues,Rock n Roll first rate music! You need a refresher brother! The term Sudani means Black, while Bidani means white, from the Arabic self described labeling of Arabist Empire conquest, enslaving Africa! Meanwhile PLO definition of Patrilineage, as the defining property, to identify Arab nationality, particularly the PalestineArab centre of ArabEmpire nationalism, places JudaeaoGerman Patrilineage, right smack dab in the centre of PalestineArab common rooted kinship! Last but not least, on the ArabEmpire conquest over JudaeanHebrew,Zion,Israel, the Mediterranean, North African South West Asian, JudaeanHebrew roots, are as PalestineArab rooted, as any PalestineArab Man Woman or child! Meanwhile you do not distinguish between the Zanzibar Black Swahili,Bantu Non Arabs and the minority ArabistAryan mixed ruling apartheid minority! The Zanzibar White Arabists can be as white as Freddy Mercury of the rock group Queen, remember?

PalestineArabs are kin to SudanArabs, a mix of ArabEmpire conquering invaders, over non Arab country! So the Patrilineal roots of Arabist men, Arabized the native first nation, matrilineal pool of JudaeanHebrew and AramaicCanaanite geneologic roots! This same pattern happened all across the ArabistEmpire, conquered Africa and South West Asian, Mediterranean countries! So now, you have First nation AramaicAssyrian-AramaeanSyriac, occupied by Arabizing, ArabistEmpire patrilineage! The same goes for Nubian, Darfur, Beja and Kordofan-Nuba Nile and Saharan Blacks, occupied by ArabistEmpire patrilineage! That is the reason self described White Bidani Arabist Patrilineage, calls them selves white, while their Arabist gulf brothers call them ABEED FOR BLACK SLAVE, FROM THE SAME ROOT WORD AS SERVANT OF ALLAH ABDUL! So you might be interested to learn that MauritanianArabist Bidani whites, also call their Black subordinates, Sudanis and Abeeds! The Fulani Free Blacks, never enslaved, are still third or fouth class due to their not speaking the standard HASSANIA Arabic,te HassaniaArabs trace their patrilineage back to the Arabian peninsula! Fulanis do speak the Koranic Classical Arabic THAT ALL EDUCTAED MUSLIM BLACK NON ARABS SPEAK! But that Islamic scholarly Koranic Arabic does not earn the SudaniFulanis the respect of the demeaning ArabistEmpireApartheid occupiers of Mauritania, any more than Darfur Muslim non Arabs! Instead the Fulanis have been gradually organizing, no thanks to the USA militant radical Black Progressives! Mostly, if at all no help or attention comes from the Jew haters of the militant radical alleged Black nationalist, activism leaders, in positions of influence like your site!

What does your map really show??? Your data range from 1921 to 2014 and from more to less reliable sources such as the US census or wikipedia. Also, which census did you use for the US numbers ? 2010? Did you use “white only” numbers? If so why?
I really don’t know how to interpret your map. Sorry to say but it makes no sense.

The truth is as can be discerned from some of the comments and the map is that in many cases white is more state of mind than color of skin. In a lot of cases it’s social and financial and can be taken to mean ” I’m better than whoever is nonwhite.”

It looks like you didn’t do your homework. Per Wikipedia, Mizrakhi and Sefardi Jews constitute about 2,721,000. The vast, vast majority of them are from other Middle Eastern and North African countries. So, they should be considered non-white. (Unless, of course, you’re using one-drop-of-white-blood for them.)

Ethiopian Jews constitute another 130,000. So, together that would make 2,851,000 non-white Jews. Add to that 1,688,600 Palestinians residing within Green Line. That makes a total of 4,539,600. Out of total population of 8,134,100.

That makes Israel about 55.81% non-white or about 44.19 white. So, Israel should be two shades lighter, if I understood your color scheme correctly.

Thanks, interesting portraits. I have never seen them before. It’s funny, but to me they look like modern Armenians/Georgians/Jews. (I have met Armenians and Georgians live as I was born in the former USSR.)

It looks like you did not read the post. According to the definition of “white” that I used all Jews are considered white.

My definition is not perfect, I admit. It is at best an approximation. But I needed something that was easy to apply uniformly across the whole world based on the information available in 2014. I tried different definitions. This one created the fewest paradoxes. Yours, for example, would apparently see Ralph Nader as non-white and Steve Jobs as half-white.

No, I did read the post. I just think it’s ridiculous, considering that you defined the surrounding Arabs/Middle Easterners among whom the majority of these Jews have lived for centuries as non-white. But, I guess, when you have an agenda to follow, why care about reality or even consistency?

I see what you mean and would even agree with you re: Americans’ view. The map does resemble that, but the issue then is two-fold. 1. As I understood it, the map is, at least partially, based on self-identification, in which case Americans’ views don’t matter, and 2. even if we get past 1, the map would need to lose internal boundaries for Canada, Russia, etc.

You can make insulting insinuations or maybe you could give me a better definition of white that I can apply consistently to the whole world with available information. I tried different ones. This was the one that I found to work best in practice, consistently.

This map is wrong in so many levels. Albanians and other Muslims in Balkans are white, but I see you have problem with the religion. Second, if Albanians, Bosniaks are not white, are Israelis and Armenians white ? Lol.

Around 1900, the census in South Africa showed that the black to white ratio was around 2:1. Now it’s 10;1. Apartheid sure was real bad for the black population,eh? Maybe you should look again at your ‘before the bad evil white people arrived’ map for South Africa. Oh, and in case you weren’t aware of it, there were no “blacks” in South Africa – they arrived from the north by migration, around the time the whites arrived in Cape Town. Yeah, I know, shocking, right? I mean, you wouldn’t want to appear racist against white people or anything!

This guy needs a history lesson. The Khoikhoi arrived at the Cape well over a thousand years before the Europeans. Even the Chinese had gotten there over two hundred years before Bartolomeu Dias. Why do white people always think they discovered everything?

if you excluded “white hispanics” then why is argentina there. Hispanics are anyone who comes from a SPANISH speaking country, hispanic has nothing to do with race! You yourself said “white hispanic” signifying that they are a person of european decent from a spanish speaking country or background, you said you would not include them because they would not count.. How if they are WHITE hispanics, yet you included argentina in which case you just contradicted yourself, very smart.

Wow. The funny thing is, if I created a map called “A Map of Colored People” you would get mad because you were lumped together with all the other races, yet you didn’t seem to have a problem doing that to us “Whites”. I would also be blasted as an insensitive racist, but as long as you’re only being racist to people who are not in your lump sum of “white” you don’t seem to care do you? You are insensitive and ignorant and you’ve created this site to find shelter (in your few followers) for your ideals and opinions that are rude to others. You make me sick. You are wasting the hard work that was sacrificed by Civil Rights movements across the world. Oh, but you probably only think that “Civil Rights Movements” happen in America with white people oppressing non-white people. Well you’re wrong. They’re happening everywhere between all types of races not just whites. Get a grip of ACTUAL reality. Go explore the world. I did mission work in Honduras, I was chastised endlessly because they assumed I did not speak Spanish. Yes, I was persecuted for being white. “Stupid gringa doesn’t know we are making fun of her.” “She has ugly hair for a gringa.” Shocker, I know. So wake up and smell the roses. NOT ALL WHITE PEOPLE ARE RACIST. And YOU are being RACIST when you say “whites are always looking down on others.” or even, “white people are so racist.” Because you’re doing exactly what you are accusing “whites” of doing. You are assuming that because my skin is white that I will automatically be racist. It’s funny how that works huh.

And I’m from the Mississippi, where everyone says is SOOOO racist. Guess what, we’ve dealt with it and we’ve put it behind us. And everyone hear (disregarding there race or religion) is SICK AND TIRED of people always assuming everyone here is a racist or insensitive, or (my favorite) “stupid, fat, country people”. Ding ding ding, if you automatically assume that someone from a certain region behaves a certain way or believes a certain thing, YOU ARE BEING RACIST. Just like you grouped entire NATIONS of people onto your “white people map” I have a feeling a lot of people would feel extremely offended by your assumptions. Just like if I said, oh Latinos are darker than white people, I’ll just group them in with black people. That’s not how it works, they are there own people group. Seriously, get it together.

Ralph Nader was called the n-word by white people growing up. I took his sister’s class and she is brown-skinned and was very supportive of the paper I wrote for her class analyzing the “Hispanic/Latino” racial project and how the U.S. has historically alternated between calling Mexican Americans “Indian” and “white” according to which better serves its interests in particular situations.

I’m from Argentina, and the whole north of the country is mostly amerindian. In all the country, the percent of white people is about the 68%, amerindians are about 30% and the rest are black and east Asians (a few).

People whi is called mestizos, are very mixed amerindians (most part) or very mixed whites.

“I thought of using both linguistics and genetics to define “white”. The trouble is that, either way, Iran, Pakistan and much of India would become part of “white”. That was not the sort of white I had in mind.”

I think you’re working too hard Abagond. In my opinion and in my experience as part of the white-European diaspora, most white people who consider themselves the ancestors of the pilgrims, settlers, George Washington, Shakespeare, Kant, Newton, Alfred Nobel, Mozart etc etc and generally of British Isles and northern European descent define whiteness fairly closely to the Nazi model even if only subconsciously. And since these whites are the ones that invented the world order, the philosophical, economic and governmental paradigms we live under and still dominate it for the most part and whose features, languages, and culture are still deemed to be the most desirable and preeminent throughout the world, their definition probably is – definitive. Why invent the wheel?

For your purposes I’d stick with that model and assume anyone who isn’t 100% northern European Anglo-Saxon looking along with the correct names and language isn’t considered fully white by Anglo-Saxons but rather “ethnic white”. Celts may be an exception but I’m not sure. So there is a hierarchy to European whiteness just as there is a hierarchy to race generally, with as you know, blacks at the bottom. Clearly being “ethnic white” isn’t as desirable as being northern European-white which is why some “ethnic whites” seem to display inferiority complexes. You’ve met the type. I recall “Pino” from Do the Right Thing. Ethnic whites hold parades. Parades, special days, parts of town (little this, little that) and other forms of attention seeking are ways people who feel they are not part of the mainstream conversation bring attention to their groups accomplishments and hopefully increase the self-confidence and pride of their members.

Many of the ethnic whites you mention like Greeks, Albanians, Slavs, some southern Italians, Caucasians etc, European looking Persians, Jews are accepted as white on a government census but less so by Anglo-Saxon civil society. Within Anglo-Saxon civil society they are considered “ethnic whites”. Ethnic whites are for the most part the ones you are referring to when you reference the “expansion of whiteness”.

I read that in Europe, Greeks and Italians often face discrimination from northern Europeans. Imagine that.

So whiteness isn’t really so hard to figure out. Just ask the people who decided what whiteness was in the first place, after all, it’s not like any of us get to decide anyway.

I thought that that idea of Whiteness – Nordics as the “true” Whites, the rest as “ethnic” Whites – died out in the US in the 1950s, certainly by the 1980s. Rates of intermarriage seem to show that. So does the way the words “race” and “ethnic” have been used from the 1910s to 2010s:

In the 1970s I can remember “ethnic” meaning like Italians or Poles, whereas now in the US it means non-Whites. People use “race” and “ethnicity” almost interchangeably. Likewise, in the early 1900s, many saw Europe as divided into maybe three “races” – Nordic, Alpine and Mediterranean – using skull measurements and everything. Back then Franz Boas could talk about the “race” problem and mean among White people. If you say “the race problem” now in the US, people think you mean Blacks and Whites.

Northern Mexico have more white population, in the states with light blue you should put medium blue…and in the rest of the border states should be medium blue as well.

For example, the state of Sonora has 65% approx. of white people, and it’s colored with light blue that means less than 50%…I live in Nuevo Leon, and I’m sure that there’s more than 50% of white people here.

Hi I would like to speak my mind, sometimes consider someone white. and not in the logic. but one thing geopolitical or cultural. it is true! people Kosovar Albanian and Bosnian and Muslim, but the lifestyle and racial and quite European! I am silly. white label not only someone for religion! it is also true that the same thing in Europe and uses Austalia and happened to Portuguese Italian southern Sicilian and Greek being seen as non-white. as in Europe and also in Italy the Arab populations! only some slightly darker shade of skin. the truth and the real part of the white race from that area that starts from the axis jerusalem-kuwait city up talking for asia, from cairo Casablanca-up to the east from the Urals to Portugal including descendants of those people who colonized the Americas and Australia

Who cares who is White in this day and age when president of USA is black. What most normal people care this days there are only four kind of people that matters: rich, poor, beautiful and ugly.
I mean Russians and Slavs are mostly White and many blond but no one trust them in contrary to for example Japanese and east Asians

The map doesn’t take absolute numbers in consideration, only percentage. Absolute numbers can also help to picture a global figure.
The USA has the largest White population on the planet with 223 million Whites. The US is followed by Russia with 146 million people, mostly Whites but Eurasians also included. Germany has 81 million people, France 66, the UK 65, Italy 60 and Spain 46, but those countries are not entirely composed of Whites.
Brazil has the third largest White population in absolute numbers with 89 million European descendants, 10 million Levantine Arabs, mostly Christian Lebanese and Syrians, 162 thousand Ashkenazi and Sephardi Jews and 800 thousand Anusim or descendants of colonial Dutch and Portuguese Crypto Jews/Marranos. Brazil is also home to 800 thousand Gypsies or Roma people, mostly Portuguese followed by Baltic and Eastern Europe Gypsies.
Brazil has 42 million Lusitanians or Portuguese people, including 1.5 million Lusitanian citizens, followed by 31 million Italian descendants, 19 million Spanish descendants, 16 million descendants of German-speaking nationalities, i.e., German, Austrian, Luxembourger and Swiss (including 7 million of full German ancestry), Pomeranians and Volga included, 6 million Slavs, mostly Poles, Ukranians, Russians, Belarusians, Croatians, Czech and Slovenes, 1.5 million Dutch descendants, 1 million French descendants, 1 million Scandinavian descendants, mostly Norwegians, 850 thousand Lithuanians and Latvians, 300 thousand Hungarians, 250 thousand British descendants including Charles Miller and Oscar Cox who popularized football in Brazil, 180 thousand White Americans, mostly descendants of 19th century Confederate colonies. American descendants include Pérola (Pearl) Ellis Byington, an accoladed educator, social activist, philanthropist and volunteer for the American and Brazilian Red Cross, Chief Justice of Brazil Ellen Gracie Northfleet, first woman to be appointed to the Supreme Court, and the singer Rita Lee Jones, dubbed “the mother of Brazilian rock’n’roll”. Brazil also has 150 thousand Finnish descendants, 150 thousand Greeks, 40 thousand Armenians and other groups like Georgians, Irish etc. The ethnicities overlap just like in Argentina. São Paulo has the largest absolute number with 30 million Whites and the state of Santa Catarina that is 49% German and Austrian has the highest percentage of whites with 86%. It used to be 95% in the 1940s. São Paulo has the largest number of Italians with 15 million people. The city of São Paulo has the largest number of Jews in the nation, also the largest Japanese diaspora. Brazil has the largest number of Japanese people outside Japan. Peru also has Japanese descendants. The other South American countries also have Chinese and Korean populations, as well as Jewish minorities.
The second most spoken language in Brazil or mother tongue is German or assorted German dialects. The Hunsrückisch dialect from Rio Grande do Sul is called Riograndenser while the local one from Santa Catarina is called Katharinensisch. 4 million people have German as their mother tongue in Brazil and 3.6 million speak Venetian Italian. Polish, Japanese, Ukrainian, Dutch, Lithuanian, Lettish, Norwegian and Russian, Yidish and Hebrew are other immigrant languages.
Argentina has over 20 million Italian descendants and Italian is the second most spoken language in the country. The number of Spaniards is also over 20 million people. Argentina is home to 6 million French descendants, 3 million Germans mostly Volga, 3 million Arabs, almost a million Irish descendants. Che Guevara had Irish ancestors. Argentina is also home to Welsh and Swedish colonies in Patagonia. There are still several Welsh speakers. Chile is home to a large number of British descendants from 19th century immigration who helped during war against Peru and Bolivia. Argentina has the largest number of Jews in Latin America, followed by Brazil. Argentina used to have around 400 thousand Jews but a few thousands moved to Israel.

The entire number of Europeans living in Sub-Saharan Africa is not much higher than 5 million. The majority live in South Africa followed by Angola. South Africa has 4 million Whites including Brits, Dutch, Portuguese and Italian. Several Boers or Boeroes (Afrikaners) migrated to North and South America during the 20th century, including US, Canada, Argentina and Brazil.
Most Whites who lived in Suriname and Guyana left after independence. Brazil received several Dutch Surinamese (or Boeroes)

Whites or Europeans in diaspora are (absolute numbers):
US 223 million;
Brazil 99 million;
Argentina between 39 and 40;
Canada 25;
Australia 20;
Mexico 20;
Colombia 18;
Venezuela 13;
Chile some estatistics say between 6 and 8, others between 8 and 10 million (Chile has 18 million people, a large Castizo population, people who are mostly European DNA with Native assimilation, and around 3 million Natives);
Cuba 7;
South Africa between 3.5 and 4.8 or 5;
Peru 5 million;
Costa Rica 3.5;
New Zealand 3.3;
Uruguay 3.1 (around 90% of Uruguay is White) ;
Puerto Rico 3;
Guatemala 2;
Dominican Republic 2;
Bolivia 2 (including several Mennonite colonies);
Ecuador 1.3;
Paraguay 1.3;
Nicaragua 1 million;
The Falklands (Malvinas) in South America have a population of 2 thousand people with several Welsh and Scottish descendants but also people from France, Gibraltar, Saint Helena, Sweden and Chile. Haiti has a very small White population between 200 and 400 thousand. Belize and Jamaica too. The White population in the Guyanas region does not reach over 60 thousand. French Guiana has the largest number, followed by Suriname.

According to DNA research people identified as Mestizo, Castizo or Caboclo in the Americas (Jessica Alba and Taylor Lautner phenotype) have a span of 70% to 90% European DNA markers with the rest being Native admixture and Mulatto or Black and White mix have a range of 60 to 80% European DNA markers. It was found that some Black people in the US aka African Americans carry Chinese blood from 19th century contact as well as European, while several White Americans carry Native genes and some African too. DNA tests with White phenotype citizens of Australia and New Zealand also showed Aboriginal and Maori blood assimilation as well as Chinese and several White phenotype South Africans have Sub-Saharan blood admixture. DNA tests with French and British Canadians have also showed Indigenous genes assimilation.

This comes after concerted efforts by Euro-Brazilians to dilute the African population in the late 1800s and early 1900s. Euro-Brazilians went to far as to encourage immigration from Europe and award idigenous land to the European immigrants as a lure. (Hmmm, where have we heard that story before?)

Alan Schlickmann, you dumped a lot of uncorroborated data in your comments. I would love to see some sources. Links?

@Afrofem
I think it was pretty obvious I was joking about the fact Mike said Whites were going extinct.

The Guardian is a leftist paper that serves their own populist agenda. It is wrong to count Castizos, Mestizos, Caboclos, Gypsies, Arabs and Eurasians as Black. It is a crime to deprive them of their identity. There are Mestizo and Eurasian groups protesting against that.

The number of Blacks and Mulattoes in Brazil are actually not that higher than the US. The US has 42 million African Americans while Brazil has 56 million Blacks and Black and White miscigenation people. Those figures you mentioned are actually counting all mixed people and non-Whites as Black. The pardo group stands for mixed and includes Castizos, Mestizos, Gypsies and Eurasians. More than half of those counted as Black are actually Mestizo or Castizo and look like Jessica Alba and Taylor Lautner. The Northern region or North-West (Amazon basin area) is actually mostly Castizo, Caboclo and Indigenous with a White minority.
Brazil has 89 million European descendants; 10 million Levantine Arabs, mostly Christian Lebanese; 162 thousand Ashkenazi and Sephardi Jews and 800 thousand Anusim, descendants of colonial Dutch and Portuguese Crypto Jews or Marranos.
800 thousand Roma people or Gypsies; 400 thousand Eurasians, mostly Ainoko or hafu, meaning Japanese and European. 2.3 million East Asians and 30 thousand South Asians and East Indians. Most Asians are Japanese. Brazil has 1.8 million Japanese people, 300 thousand Chinese, 50 thousand Taiwanese and 150 thousand Koreans.
Caboclo people are people whose genes span from 70% to 90% European (mostly colonial Portuguese, Dutch, French and Spanish) with the rest being Native blood admixture. In Spanish they use the word Castizo. Brazil has 43 million Caboclos or Castizos/Mestizos. The number of Indigenous people who live in reservations is 500 thousand. 160 thousand people speak speak Indigenous languages. Brazil has 42 million Mulattos and 13 million Blacks. According to DNA research people who identify as Mulatto or Black and White mix have a range of 62 to 80% European DNA markers (colonial Portuguese, Dutch and French) with the other markers being Sub-Saharan African blood assimilation.
Argentina and Uruguay have small Mulatto populations. Peru has a Black minority and Colombia, Venezuela, Suriname and Guyana have a considerable Black and Mulatto population. In French Guiana, Suriname and Guyana there are the Maroon people, formerly called Bush Negroes. Peru also has East Asians and Colombia and Venezuela also received European and Arab immigration. They also have Jewish minorities. Peru and Venezuela have large Chinese populations.

Brazil 55,900,000 including multiracial people, 6.84% (black) + 20.6% (mulatto pardos) Flavia C. Parra et al., http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC140919/#id2601616 Color and genomic ancestry in Brazilians. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 100 (2003). Second paragraph.

It did not seem to be a “crime” to deprive African descent people of their identity during centuries of European domination in Brazil and throughout the Americas. To me all of these racial sub-classifications (such as Castizos, Mestizos and Mulattoes) were a way to deny and deprive people of African descent pride in their all parts of their heritage,
their contributions to the greater culture and most importantly, their political power.

The primary reason the Portugeuse and Spanish devised all of these spurious sub-classifications was to create division among people of African descent and antipathy toward Blackness and worship of Whiteness.

It worked for a long time, but in the words of that B.B. King song, the thrill is gone. African Brazilians and “blended” Brazilians, regardless of their degree of African heritage seem to be entering a period of respecting everyone in their family tree, not just the Europeans or the Indigenous members.

That may seem like deprivation to some, but to me, the majority of Brazilians pride and respect in their African ancestry is long overdue.

✦✦✦✦✦✦✦✦✦✦✦✦✦✦✦✦✦✦✦✦✦✦✦✦✦✦✦✦✦✦✦✦✦✦✦✦✦✦✦✦✦✦✦✦

Linking to a source in Portuguese such as nacaomestica.org is unhelpful. English language sources are preferable.

Wikipedia, to me, is a source of last resort. With that site, the question of who wrote this article(?) is always topmost in my evaluation of data and conclusions presented in the articles.

All of that being said, thank you for supplying some links. We will have to agree to disagree on what the information you presented means in the lives of Brazilians.

Wow! How is a person who’s mostly European DNA and partially Native American Black? They identify themselves as Castizo, Mestizo or Caboclo. They don’t have recent Sub-Saharan ancestors. Only if you count 400 thousand years ago. How is an Eurasian Black? Do Americans label Eurasian Keanu Reeves as Black? How is a Roma (Gypsy) individual Black? Is Kate Beckinsale who has Chinese-Burmese ancestors Black? Angelina Jolie has Native American assimilation. Is she Black? Are Jessica Alba and Taylor Lautner deemed as Black?
Are people from New Zealand who are mostly White and partially Maori as well as Canadians with Métis admixture Black people? Would they be African American?

The last census took place in 2010. There are several pdf links provided.

This seems like a trolling using pseudo-leftism to serve your own agenda and justify your own invested interests just like The NY Times and The Guardian overrating or underestimating numbers to fit their agenda.

It is a crime to label Levantine Arabs, Jews, Roma people aka Gypsies, Asians, Eurasians, Mestizos and Indigenous peoples from the Americas as Black.

Mestizo, Castizo and Mulatto are terms that American and Brittish English borrowed from Spanish. That’s the reason I used them.

Brazil is in the Americas. The majority of the people who identify as mixed is Mestizo and Genetic tests showed that they have a span of 70% to 90% European markers with Native American Pre-Columbian admixture. That is the reason why Jessica Alba and Taylor Lautner have the phenotype they have. Other mixed include Gypsies, Eurasians, Mulattos and Cafuzos. The figures are clear you just have to read them.

In 1498 Brazil had 3.2 million Natives. A large percentage died from the flu and smallpox. Brazil received 3.6 million Sub-Saharan Africans as slaves from the 1550s untill the 19th century. 4 million Portuguese migrated to Brazil. 1.5 million between 1951 and 1975. Between the 1820s and 1940s Brazil received another 7 million Europeans, including Ashkenazi and Sephardi Jews, plus 600 thousand Levantine Arabs and starting in 1908 the country received 270 thousand Japanese people, and later 100 thousand Koreans and 200 thousand Chinese people.

Mixed people descend from settlers from the colonial period.

European descendants, Levantine Arabs, Jews and East Asians descend from 19th century and 20th century immigration during the Imperial and Republican periods. Recent immigration.
It is pretty obvious. Just like the History of Hispanic America, US and Canada.

Nothing you provided has any recent data to it. On top of that your argument is based solely on how you believe it should be rather than facts presented in your sources. You opinion is people should identify as white because of their mostly European DNA, but fact of the matter is people are often pushed into a category based on a drop of black blood. Pull all the numbers you want, but how a person chooses to identify is up to them not you. That is not pseudo-leftism that is reality.

Re: White Mormons

Many of them suffer from fertility issues, so if you are counting on them to save the white race then you will be counting a long time.

White people have mainly themselves to blame. They are not having enough babies. No one is forcing them to do that. As a consequence, they depend on immigration just to keep their countries going, to make up for the children they did not have.

Also, they screwed up many of the very countries that immigrants come from.

Maybe that is why the birthrate in Israel is so high compared to other developed nations. They’re worried that if falls too low, they’ll be forced to rely on (non-Jewish) immigration. And of course they’d never consider that option.

On the “European Diaspora” page on wikipedia, there is a map of people of European descent. It matches closely to yours but is not identical (it includes the Balkans as White, for example). I wonder if it was influenced by your map or not, since you had not come across a “map of White people” before.

Yes! It was the shades of blue that reminded me of your map. Upon reading further, that map is even more similar to yours than I thought. I guess the creator of that map does NOT consider Muslims in the Balkans to be White after all. I guess the reason they shaded it light blue is to reflect the Christian minorities there.

He says he excludes Muslims as “European” since otherwise he would have to count much of South West Asia as European. Same as me.

He counts Ashkenazic Jews as European but not other Jews. I counted all Jews as White, but I agree with him. After all, according to my definition, Ethiopian Jews are “White”. It was never an issue though, since it did not show up on the map.

Where we do disagree and where it does show up on the map is Lebanese Christians. I count them, he does not. He counts Christians in Armenia, but not those in Lebanon or Egypt. He seems to base that on language: Armenians speak an Indo-European language, Arab Christians do not. He does admit that it was an arbitrary decision.

All this confirms for me that all those drive-by commenters who say I am an idiot for not including Albanians have never tried to make a map like this – or even seriously thought about what they mean by “White”. It is just one of those contradictory ideas they complacently base their life on.

Israel is not anymore ‘white’ than Syria, Lebanon, or Iraq. Jews are closest related to northern middle eastern and south caucasian populations. Jews are descended mainly from Hebrews and other mediterranean peoples from Italy and Greece.

In fact, the only significant admixture that Ashkenazi Jews have is italian/greek. Sefaradi Jews also have this admixture and are no darker than many ashkenazi jews. Both groups are more related to each other than to any other populations. Same race.

A prime minister of England was a sefaradi jew, Benjamin d’israeli,, are you seriously saying he is not white? But that some olive skinned or brown skinned ashkenazi from Israel is white? That makes zero sense.

As for mizrahim, you really need to get out more. Plenty of Syrian Jews are lighter than ashkenazi jews. It goes both ways. Even some Iraqi Jews are white. And Iranian Jews have their share of white skinned people.

A genetic study done even showed that Azerbaijani Jews (descended from persian speaking jews) cluster with Ashkenazi Jews. This was an mt-dna study too.

If Israel is white, then so is Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Iran, etc.

I was in Albania recently ( 3 months ago), believe me their whiter than Portuguese people, Spanish people, Turks, Greeks, or Bulgarians. I also think that turks are whiter than Portuguese people from what i have seen… however the point was that cuz Albanians are muslims their not white? this has no logic, especially in a country like Albania where you find catholics, orthodox,muslims and other stuff and they all claim to be Albanians, thats funny and beautiful to see a country like Albania, however the one who wrote or made is web page i think knows little bit Albanians and belives to much in imaginary friends…whom all are from ASIA (christians and muslims)— all religions have been born there

Wff albanian and kosovo are purest clean white race in europe stupid ignorants
Muslims are not race is religion dont mix religion with ethnicity
How many muslims are white 4exemple im white albanian muslim from north west fyrom

Abagong I am absolutely certain that you’re not white! Would think you’re Jewish, Serbian and Greek! I am Albanian, and proud of my nation, we are the cleanest people in Europe, we do not mix with other races like in western Europe)) And we are Albanians, we do not care about religion))) if you think you can be white thanks that you are Christian, you have deceived yourself thoroughly for Jesus was not white)) would think you’ve never read history.

what do you tell ???????
i’m albanian i’m white and i have green eyes, my mum has grey eyes, my dead has green eyes, my cousins are blond…
albanian poeple is the oldest for europe!!!
How we can’t be white?????

@abagond The Albanians we descend from the Illyrians, We are the oldest population of Europe, it’s proved scientifically , We were polytheistic, after catholic and only from 1500 we were forced to be converted to the Islam, albanian we are white people , i’m white my family are white , my freunds albanian are white , the all albanian are white , We Albanians we do not mix with other origins! Romania is black , Bulgaria is black , 50% and more of greece are black , the religion is religion the race is the race ! the religion is not a race.

Albanians were historically Christian, only converting to Islam in large numbers in the 1600s. And it appears that most converted to escape discrimination rather than out of genuine belief. In any case if you count Lebanese Christians as White than why not Albanian Christians?

@resw
The Ottoman Empire has massacred us the Albanians,
Serbian has massacred us the Albanians,
Greece has massacred us the Albanians,
Bulgarie has massacred us the Albanians,
Because we are white!
But the USA tey protect us , he They bombed serbian , turks , greek.
Austria was also in the Ottoman Empire but they are white same for the albanian we are white.
serbian has massacred crotian and albanian because we are white.

Race and religion are very much bound up. Muslims are an out-group that most Whites see as an Other against which they define themselves. Thus all the Islamophobia, even from Whites who probably have not gone to church for years, if ever, like Mr Trump.

Starting with the Crusades, Westerners enslaved, killed and took the land of non-Christians and used religion as an excuse. But when said non-Christians converted in numbers (Muslims and Jews in Spain, Blacks and Natives in the Americas), that no longer worked, so race became the new excuse.

“Albanians were historically Christian, only converting to Islam in large numbers in the 1600s. And it appears that most converted to escape discrimination rather than out of genuine belief. In any case if you count Lebanese Christians as White than why not Albanian Christians?”

Not buying it. It shows a level of assimilation into the Ottoman Empire that you do not see in, say, the Serbs or Greeks.

i have give you the prove and you no, de world know albanian are white USA protect us , you don’t believe he is your problem , you went to Albania ? no ,Then you know nothing! , you just juge albanian for religion , it’s funny , the world know. hahahaha

“…We Albanians we do not mix with other origins! Romania is black , Bulgaria is black , 50% and more of greece are black …”

Please define what you mean by “White” and “Black”. I’m sure it would be news to the Romanians, Bulgarians and Greeks that they are “black”. Even the Roma (Gypsies, Romani people) in those countries are of South Asian descent mixed with Europeans from their time in slavery in Eastern Europe.

This is how modern Roma people look:

According to an article on the Romedia Foundation website, Roma slavery is described in detail:

“For almost five centuries, Roma lived as slaves in the Romanian Principalities, from the moment of their birth, as the code of Wallachia mentions in the 19th century. They were treated as objects with exchange value, being sold in auctions, donated, given as gifts at weddings, or simply used to repay debt. The slave was the master’s property, with no legal status. Marriage at a young age was encouraged, having as many children as possible being expected in order to increase the master’s property. Still not widely known, the details of the Roma slavery are one of the first institutionalised discriminatory practices against this group.

[…] in the case in which a free person wanted to marry a slave, automatically that person became a slave, too, along with any child born from a Roma mother. Thinking about rebelling? The master, having complete rights over the slaves, could apply any punishment considered to be appropriate, from flogging, to the cutting of the lips and ears, whipping the sole of the feet, public beatings, the only constraint being not to kill the slave, action which, anyway, would have been counterproductive for the estate.

The abolition [of Roma slavery] came only … as a response to the freeing of the slaves in USA and introduction of mechanization.

This is so stupid . Albania and Kosovo don’t count as white just because they are muslims??? , what has to do the belief of a country with their race? Go to Albania , and Kosovo and see the people there, 100% white . And to sum up Albanians are one of the whitest race in Europe as they do not mix with other races , but I don’t have to talk . It’s obvious that the person who did this map is totally ignorant . Visit Albania and see how we are 100% white

I always encounter this issue when I go to a website on race, ethnicity, etc. You say Muslims are not white. Why? Did you know that Muslim is a religion like Christianity, Catholicism, Judaism, Buddhism etc. You can be any race and be any religion. Please don’t confuse apples with oranges. And I would suggest as a friend, that you go to a library and get information about the different racial groups. You will see that there is no mention of religion as a race identifier. Cheers.

I thought I had posted a comment but I forgot that submit it. It was about cautioning you not to confuse race with religion. You mention in your article that Albanians are not white because they’re Muslim? Is like saying French and Italian are not white because they’re Christians? It’s comparing apples to oranges! I would suggest as a friend to go to a library and consult reference books on race and you will see there’s absolutely no connection with religion. It’s a common mistake among those who decide to get a website and write about topics that that they have done little or no research on. Once you publish, shame on you for misguiding others. It’s like the blind leading the blind. Good luck.

I just posted that Judaism is a religion not a race. You can be from Tonga or Pango Pango and you can be Jewish by faith if you so choose. And by the way I’ve never heard of Mizrahi Jews. I do know Isaac Mizrahi and he is Jewish.

While Judaism is indeed a religion that anybody can potentially convert to, it has generally been practiced by a select few ethnic groups throughout history. One of them is the Mizrahi Jews, the Jews who never left the Middle East and went to Europe (or elsewhere). Sort of like how anybody can potentially be Amish, but virtually all the Amish are of Germanic heritage.

What a fucking dumbass retard whoever constructed the map,jow dare you say since albania and kosovo is muslim you fucking piece ofahit ,we are whiter than what you are you fucking mutt ,go fuckyourself

My, how people in the “Old World” do get butthurt over the suggestion that they might not be 100% lily white.

The next time a French troll like apportune or jacques comes by and declares people in the USA are “too hung up” on race because we “don’t understand the Old World and its long history” and that in Europe “race doesn’t matter,” I’m going to have to remember to direct them to this comment thread.

Street perceptions of White people in Chile and Argentina are always tricky because White people in those countries is “stirred but not mixed”: In Argentina, most europeans settled in the capital, and a minority of germans in the South (Bariloche).The northern provinces bordering Bolivia and Paraguay are definitely Amerindian/andean/Amazonian, and those close to the Andes are white/mestizo/castizo.
Chile is the same story: the Far North is mostly black/amerindian (example: the 33 San Jose miners), center is the typical mestizo, and as you move further south, the white/mestizo rate changes (example: http://bit.ly/2kAWBqq )

You are just a dumb ass trying to act smart !! Im albanian there are all white people in Albania , about 80% have fair skin !! Im albanian my skin is more faire than that of a french girl and î have blond hair!! Have you learnt some history you loser ? Albania is Christian for more than 2000 years and 50% still is !! Islam came from the ottoman empire is not a religion of origins !! You should be some black dude yourself I think !! And since when race and religion are the same thing ? Idiot

@Afrofem
@Sharina
Typical angry Black SJW women attacking White people. The bloke was making a point about demographics and the absolute numbers of whites in the Americas and these two tried to interfere with the debate imposing themselves and wresting terms like Mestizo and Eurasian. Just like all fat acceptance SJWs who wrench reality and deny biology.
According to the UN, governmental and CIA statistics the numbers for the Americas seem accurate. Chile does have a large Castizo and Native population.
Brazil is bigger than Europe and the contiguous US. The bloke was saying that half of Brazil is Caucasoid (European and Ashkenazi Jew), a quarter is Mestizo, less than a quarter is Black and Mulatto, with East Asians (mostly Japanese), Eurasians, Gypsies and Natives being the minorities that complete the total number. If the whites in the Southern Cone were a country they would be bigger than most European countries, and the white populations in Canada, Australia and New Zealand together. South African whites are a lost cause and currently living under discrimination, with many Afrikaners living in extreme poverty. They should migrate and receive asylum.

Sharina and Afrofem are regulars here and comment freely and frequently. They don’t require your permission or your approval.

Typical angry white male racist, coming to a black-owned blog written for black people and thinking his voice is still more important because he’s a white male. Trying to belittle and shame black women for taking equal part in a debate. Using racial slurs. Imposing his superior white male attitude and expecting everyone to meekly put up with his offensive interference. Typical atrocious manners of a white supremacist.

Nothing in my comments were angry so you are basically mad at the truth. I also never mention Mestizo and Eurasian, so WTF are you even talking about? The dude didn’t make a good point if it was so easily debunked. You can’t make a point off of outdated sources as if in that time period the population did not grow. The population changed drastically in 2002 to more recently. So you point was a moot one.

Sources were provided and his very own sources debunked what he was claiming at the time. The most recent stats on Brazil say only 47.7 claim to be white in Brazil. That is less than half. Do research.

It is pretty well-known in Europe that Brazil is larger than Europe including Eastern Europe. Australia the same and Brazil is bigger than Australia. Have u heard about the Mercator distortion that makes Africa seem much smaller than Russia and even Greenland? It’s insane how grossly disproportionate Greenland is when compared to giant Africa. And we still use the Mercator map.

Buzzfeed – 19 Maps That Will Help You Put The United States In Perspective.
The U.S. is basically an overcompensating, attention-seeking brat.

I guess the original claim was that the Pardo people group means multiracial and it includes a lot of Mestizo people, Native and European, encompassing Black and White, Black plus White plus Native, Eurasian aka Asian and White. And even Gypsies cuz the Roma are European with distant Northern East Indian ancestry.

South America is indeed a pretty diverse place. They have ethnicities from every continent. I was surprised to learn that Confederates moved to Mexico and Brazil.

And that Venezuela and Peru have millions of Chinese with coolie background. I’m aware that Mexico is in North Murica, NAFTA lol.
Actually Brazil was the first region to be called America after Amerigo Vespucci. I guess German cartographers started the tribute.
And also that Argentina’s Jewish community suffered terrorist attacks claimed by radical Muslims. Wow!

@Afrofem
Oh I didn’t realize he meant both land masses. As big as Brazil might be that’s still impossible hehe! Not even the entire Russian territory is that big

I like the humor in the Buzzfeed article.

The US government states that China is smaller than US cuz China has a lot of territorial disputes with its neighbours and is pushing their maritime borders over Philippines, while China says the US claims interior water bodies as land to overcompensate. So I guess in this case, size matters. For projecting political power purposes. Some experts say Russia with its shrinking population faces a future threat of Chinese population invading the Federation’s Southeast.

I guess I heard about the Dominican case. That’s sad. While in the rest of the Americas people are using DNA research to learn more about their past. I’ve seen some YouTube videos about it.
The Haitian refugees issue reminds me of Saudi Arabia and the United Emirates not accepting a single Syrian refugee.

How can u say Albanians are not white when they defended Europe alone for 25 years against Ottoman Empire, you have no rights to do these kinda of maps if you don’t know the history of white people in EU.Religion doesn’t tell your race, Albanians have all religions and Albanians have never had an religious disruption.

IN FACT,you piece of filth,according to a study of the University of California “Genetic Ancestry across Europe”,not only have same genetic like all other Europians,but Albanians have the highest rates of IDB within a population in Europe,sharing about 90 ancestors in the last 500 years and about 600 ancestors between 500 years and 1,500 years ago.

Not only we are white you filth,but are the most pure not mixed in Europe,even for your beloved Nazi scum,we were a “Aryan race”!

Since somebody speaks here about Albanians as “Caucasians” probably they confuse the Caucasian Albania(a polity which existed in the antiquity in the territory of the modern Azerbaijan Republic in Southern Caucasus) with Balcanic Albania(ethnically it includes the Republic of Albania, Kosovo and a part of the Fyrom(Former yugoslav republic of macedonia).

As far as I know, Balkanian Albanians are fully indigenous to the Balkan Area and have no relation whatsoever to Caucasus or Caucasians. There is an ongoing scientific dispute whether they stem from Illyrians or maybe Thracians or Dacians, but indigenous Balcanic peoples in any case.

The most of Kosovar Albanians are Sunni Muslims, but the people in the Republic of Albania can be Roman Catholic, Sunni Muslim, Bektashi Muslim and Orthodox Christian).

Being second level White people is a sore spot for Eastern Europeans. Even the Russians look down on Albanians…being so close to Turkey and all.

The creation of Whiteness by colonial slaveholders has spread around the globe. That successful bit of social engineering causes marginal White people to nearly lose their minds at the slightest hint they are not considered White.

I am being serious. Please explain it to me like I am a five-year-old: why is it so important for you to identify yourself with the worst band of killers and thieves in history?

It does not make sense to me. What makes sense is to be embarrassed, ashamed, sheepish, to try to distance yourself from them as much as possible. Albania, as far as I know, did not take part in the West’s crimes, certainly not on a huge scale, so why assert a connection with them? It does not make sense. I am missing something.

I did change schools at one point and was never taught long division, so maybe I missed out on this too. Along with the memo on the beauty of skinny blonde women.

In terms of land taken and people killed, no one (so far) has outdone White countries over the past 500 years. The Mongols come second.

Exactly. Evil races are just evil. The bigly evillness of them puts them on the level of orcs. Sad!

@ Albanopolis

I am being serious. Please explain it to me like I am a five-year-old: why is it so important for you to identify yourself with the worst band of killers and thieves in history?

It does not make sense to me. What makes sense is to be embarrassed, ashamed, sheepish, to try to distance yourself from them as much as possible. Albania, as far as I know, did not take part in the West’s crimes, certainly not on a huge scale, so why assert a connection with them? It does not make sense. I am missing something…… so maybe I missed out on this too. Along with the memo on the beauty of skinny blonde women.

When i google it “white countries” and saw my countriy was not in the white countries,i thought you were some Serbian prick who just wanted to troll Albanians,or some Christian supremacist who thinks Muslims can’t be white LOL

But no,i was mistaken,and all the Albanians above were to!

By the way,paint that map because Albanians will never be on your side of opinion.

About white people, they created this civilization,others just follow it…

In the US only about 35% think he is doing a good job. Most people I know despise him, myself included.”

Don’t believe to much in the MSM polls,they said he couldn’t get the nominee and look what happend!

You should despise more the Democrats …

Black vote for DNC is always +90%. If the number drops to 80% for the DNC would be very difficult to win an election. So they use racism card with MSM help to keep the tension high among blacks so they can get their vote.

They never talk for blacks real problems,in fact they avoid them,and attack anyone who talks about it as a racist.

DNC and MSM scream all day long for racism “white privilege”etc. because “Racism” is the only thing they have to offer to blacks,since they don’t say or do nothing for the high murder rate blacks against blacks,for they poor conditions,they failed cites,etc. And unfortunately the blacks buy it.

“Black vote for DNC is always +90%. If the number drops to 80% for the DNC would be very difficult to win an election.”

Actually the Repubs have diminished Black, Latinx, student and elder votes with various voter suppression schemes such as gerrymandering, voter ID requirements and poll closures. The outdated Electoral College is all that allowed your hero to become president. He actually lost the election by 2.8 million votes.

It doesn’t matter what percentage of eligible Black people vote, the elections are stacked against Black voters and in favor of minority Repub voters.

Neither the RNC nor the DNC cares about the percentage of Black voters.

You have been reading too many White Supremacist websites. Repeating their racist propaganda shows your ignorance about US politics.

About white people, they created this civilization,others just follow it…For you blakcs,your self victimization today is your biggest problem. I am out here.

Then he goes and adds another comment below! Sad!

Black vote for DNC is always +90%. If the number drops to 80% for the DNC would be very difficult to win an election. So they use racism card with MSM help to keep the tension high among blacks so they can get their vote.

If white privilege doesn’t exist, why are you so anxious to be categorized as white? How could it possibly matter whether or not you’re considered to be white, unless you believe you gain something from it?

Why does it matter so much to you that you call people nasty names like “filth” and “moron” for suggesting you might not be white?

Mr. “I’m Outraged That You Don’t Consider Me White” really shows his colossal ignorance about the dysfunctional two party system in the USA with his comments about Black people voting for the Dems.

Of course.cause we really do know how much these people really do care about the about the neighbourhood safety, economic protection, public services and other civil amenities and issues that affect the Afro-American constituency on a day-to-day basis. Right?

Just like they are so very concerned about the daily nutritional intake of the average Zimbabwean that they are always so concerned about. Right?

The sad thing about these Scolders is that when they scold us, they don’t realize that they reveal their own inadequecies. They want that feeling of moral superiority – that dopamine rush – of scolding their morally bankrupt neighbours, whether they be educated blacks , poor blacks, activist blacks, or any Venn Diagram intersection thereof. But if your only claim to moral superiority is to scold people who are morally bankrupt….what does that say about the Scolder?

I suppose being Nominally White may be another way to achieve moral superiority.

Because we are white,and that’s not an opinion that’s a fact. Quit the crap.

@Afrofem,

I understand the two party system better than you!

The blacks have the power to change their situation they don’t need another party! The Dems can’t win without the black vote,they can put conditions for their vote,but don’t! They just vote for them,the Dems keep brainwashing with the racism card,and that’s it! They take 90% of the black vote,and give nothing back!

What have Obama done for the Black Community?

What social policies have he take to improve black life?

Black marriage is a disaster,black cites are a disaster,black crime to the sky,the black fathers who abandon their children,a catastrophe!

He spent billions for Middle-east Pakistan etc but nothing for the problems above.

Be smart,and use the power of your vote to improve your community conditions,before they replace your vote with the hispanics one. And don’t need you anymore.

Obviously you don’t know much about the two party system if you think anyone has power by voting. Voting is a show.

“lack marriage is a disaster”—Not entirely true as most blacks get married later in life. The stats were re-evaluated years ago and showed it is not that blacks aren’t getting married just later.

“black cites are a disaster”–Depends on where you go. Some are, but then again what poor city is fantastic.

“black crime to the sky”–Crime is to the sky but if you analyze data most reporting methods are based on arrest and an arrest is not a conviction. Being arrested more does not mean you are committing more crime.

“the black fathers who abandon their children,a catastrophe!”–False. A study came out some years back showing black fathers to be more involved that other races despite not being in the home.

The plot thickens being “nominally white” and second level on the hierarchy of whiteness makes for angry Albanopolis. It takes so much energy being bitter and butt hurt about not being at the top of the pyramid of whiteness. How tragic.

Be smart,and use the power of your vote to improve your community conditions,before they replace your vote with the hispanics one. And don’t need you anymore.

Concern troll is a concern troll.

The blacks have the power to change their situation they don’t need another party!

Black people. The Saviours of American Democracy. I suppose it has to do with American blacks Hive Mind psychic ability. I wonder when the Hispanics will evolve this ability.

The blacks have the power to change their situation they don’t need another party! The Dems can’t win without the black vote,they can put conditions for their vote,but don’t! They just vote for them,the Dems keep brainwashing with the racism card,and that’s it! They take 90% of the black vote,and give nothing back!

Considering that the Dems have lost over 1000 seats during the Obama administration, ignored Bernie, lost the Obama coalition and failed, I think they may be doing a little bit more listening and less fundraising.

What have Obama done for the Black Community?

What social policies have he take to improve black life?

Black marriage is a disaster,black cites are a disaster,black crime to the sky,the black fathers who abandon their children,a catastrophe!

He spent billions for Middle-east Pakistan etc but nothing for the problems above.

Crooked Albinopolis thinks he’s white when he can’t be white. Can’t ever be white because White people can’t be Muslims. Crooked Albinopolis is a Muslim. So he’s not white. Sad! He never talks about how bigly the Republicans sell out their own kind. Albinopolis and his sock-puppet troll friends are don’t understand how bad the two-party system – believe me.

this map is wrong… im turkish very pale blonde guy and have blonde family, muslims can be white too… turkey is multi ethnic country there is browns asians and whites in country… iif u go close to middle east u will see brown looking people if u go towards west u will see white people,

also kosova,bosnia, albania,south africa shud be white too … albania kosova should be dark blue and south africa turkey should be medium…
israel should be medium too they are so mixed like turkey aswell so many brown and white people together.

lmao its funny you say that, my problem here is that ppl think turkey is like arab country and have camels and deserts or speak arabic and shit..
but its wrong we dont have desert or camels, we dont speak arabic.

we ”turks” in turkey arent even turk anymore we lost our genetics, look at real other turk countries they are all asian, turkish ppl are just like so many ethnic groups got mixed and live under 1 flag, turkey country is not nation its just a flag tbh.. cause when u walk at street u will see asian looking ppl brown ppl white ppl all call theirself turkish.

+im not muslim, pretty sure half of turkey isnt muslim too.. they just write muslim in your id when you born and you can get rid of it when u grow up but no one cares to change ur religionon paper cause it means nothing xD
if u look at me and my non religious friends ids it says muslim on all

Abalesh, you classified Albanians as non white? you are a fucking mad!? Have you never seen an Albanian or never been there. Do you know that the Albanian are in Europe even before Greeks. Don’t write shit because you don’t know a shit. If there wasn’t the Albanians with Skanderbeg to stop the Turks, now Europe was going to be called Europistan. O go away you cow 😠😠😠

Interesting how so many of them assume Abagond is a Serb or some other close neighbor with whom the Albanians have bad history. Makes me wonder how often they lob “you’re not white” at each other as an insult in that part of the world.

LOOOOL. I must be Serbian because only a Serbian would think so little of Albanians as to call them non-White?

If you look at the rest of my blog you might notice I do not hold a particularly high opinion of White people. They wiped out people on two and a half continents (as shown by the map itself) and enslaved millions of Black people. They are worse than the Mongols. So if anyone should be offended by my map it should be Serbs, not Albanians.

If Turks ARE White, then where in Asia and Africa do you draw the line between White people and everyone else? If you walk from Albania to Kenya, where do White people end and Black or Brown people begin?

These are the questions I had to answer to make this map. And they are the questions that people who do not like my map have yet to answer. Calling me names might be emotionally satisfying, but it leaves the map unchanged.

These comments by alleged Albanians about their “White” status are real howlers! The frequency and intensity of their outrage shows how marginal they really are to the the general European/White population.

Also highlights how potent a drug “Whiteness” is for millions of beige people.

Because the Albanians are white, and not green or blue or other colors from the fantasy of a mentally disturbed person on the internet who (for any sick intention that he will not say) has made so much effort to produce such a stupid map where he makes a fool of himself by insist the opposite of reality about the Albanians.

I know it’s very hard for you and your “friends” to understand such “complicated things”, but don’t worry, time clears everything up. if not this year then in 50 years you will get it.

This discussion really sums it all up doesn’t it? Since race is a made up social construct that was invented to belittle others, then it’s never up to a person to decide their own race. I’m only called White because others around me perceive me to be. Rachel Dolezal tried/is trying to declare herself Black or transracial, but it’s not up to her. Trevor Noah may have identified as Black, but was often perceived differently based on where he grew up… None of us gets to choose our race, it is chosen for us by idiotic group-think.

So, Abagond’s map is Abagond’s map. Alban, Erri, me, and all of us can all create our own maps based on our own definitions of “Whiteness”… at the end of the day, it’s all just made up… unfortunately, with very real consequences. We’ve all bought into it, which is why we’re arguing the Whiteness of Albanians… Honestly, arguing for recognition as White because you perceive non-Whites as inferior based on the made up concept of race… Sounds pretty White to me.

Wow, all this vitriol over Abagond’s map and the discourse of “whiteness “ and Albanians is quite interesting to say the least. The negative responses to who is white and who isn’t says a lot about how being “white” is coveted on the European hierarchy of White Supremacy.

Such idiotic maps makes only racists like you all. (you are black racists that copy white racists … white racists, black racist, yellow racists, red racists; you all have exactly the same stupid mentality. You are all a shame of mankind)

I’am sorry, but your consciousness is too deep and your intellect too limited to discuss scientifically. It feels for me like I talk to a wall.

How do you imagine an intellectual discussion with me, when for you it’s all “greek” what I have said so far !?

Once you become civilized and live in the 21st century and dont copy more white racist from 18-19 century, then we can discuss about smart things.

cheers
.

PS.: I have many dark-skinned friends, very good friends from africa and asia, but I do not say that they are “not dark-skinned” and “nonreligious” like me, and they do not say about me i am “not white” and “muslim” or “christian” or “hindus” or “buddhist”, because we are not stupid and retarded racists and extremists. We acept us so like we are. Finish.

Ah one more thing, I dont want that you think like me and my acquaintances, I just want that you think.

Alban baby, unlike mean old Abagond and his friends, let me reassure you that you and your people are white. Latin for white, as Abagond knows all too well, is Albus. Albania, no doubt a derivation like albumen, etc., by definition, probably means Land of the Whites, i.e. you and yours, just as Kmt, the name of ancient Egypt, meant land of the blacks. I hope that reassures you of your whiteness and you will move on to more productive fields where you won’t be the butt of cruel jokes as you’ve endured here.
People, we must have compassion for even our ‘Alban’ brothers.

Please by all means highlight this intellectual conversation you were attempting to have? So far you did a great job at name calling and I applaud you, but don’t claim to be something or doing something I doubt you could accomplish.

FYI gro jo was making fun of you and if you didn’t catch that then please don’t proclaim ever to speak on intellect.

Albanians are whiter than greeks and bulgars yet you havent included them because 50% are muslim? Douche. We are the one single people who has taken the biggest bladt of an inadin non-white force in the 1400s, and saved entire europe from islamization by the ottomans. Even if we were hindus, obly because of that historic fact, you should included us. Our language is the springboard to ALL european languages… this makes me sad. Shame on you.

I don´t know, white in Latin America has a completely different meaning countries like Chile, Costa Rica, Argentina, Uruguay and Puerto Rico have large “white” populations but most of them are mixed but predominately european, around 58% of argentines have some degree of native american blood, the average costa rican is 70% white, 25% native and 5% black, most white cubans live now in the USA and black, mulatoes and mixed are now majority back in the island, something similar happened with Puerto Rico and Uruguay has a lot of black heritage but they try to hide it by all means, the Americas is a mixed continent, most of “white” americans are also mixed, Obama was not even black for latin american terms, he was a mulato-mixed-average guy in Dominicana.

The Americas are mostly based on self-identification in polls and censuses. As pointed out in the post:

“In the case of self-identification, note that someone who is considered white in one country might not be considered white in another.”

If the map was based on, say, a non-Hispanic White person in the US judging pictures of random people from different countries, then the Americas, even the US itself, would probably be much less White than is shown on this map.

Actually, the person who created this went to an Ivy League university. Meanwhile, you managed to make six errors in the span of one sentence.

Your comment should read, “Whoever created this didn’t go to university.” The first letter of a sentence is always capitalized. “Whoever” is one word. “Didn’t” contains an apostrophe. You completely forgot the word “to”. Your spelling of “university” didn’t even make phonetic sense. Finally, you forgot a period at the end of your sentence.

I literally know elementary schoolers who write better than you, including some who don’t speak English as a first language. Come back and comment when you’ve passed the first grade – or don’t, since I doubt anyone will miss you.

Fuck off you dickhead you must be some slavic prick what you mean Albanians are not because they are Muslim why don’t you go and put some stocking and thongs on and then a big dildo up ur fucking asshole you racist fuck we Albanians we are the only white race with big dicks

A girl was reading a magazine that stated that black men had the biggest “guns”. A white man who was nearby approaches and says:
– Excuse me, but this statistics is innacurate
– What do you mean?
– There are two nonblack groups who have even bigger “documents” than blacks
– Who are they?
– Native brazilians and Jews

They chat a lot, and the man impresses the girl with his knowledge of biology, anatomy, anthropoly and biostatistics. When they depart, the girl asks:
– So glad to meet you. But I don’t know your name!
– Ubirajara Rosenstein

Allbania is white, majority AND historically Christian. We probably are probably under the top 10 contributors of European civilization. We’ve lived in Europe for over 3,500 years! Simply awful and misleading.

Race has nothing to do with religion ! Your mind is a mess ! You have decided that peoples from North Africa, Middle East and from some parts of Europe are non-white juste because they are muslm : this is bullshit ! The white race includes Europeans, North Africains and middle-easterners as well whatever the culture or the religion ….

I’m so confused as to why you don’t classify Albanians or Bosnians as white. Both of these people have European and Christian ancestry. The difference is a lot of these people were converted to Islam as a result of the ottoman empire. Plus I should mention that Albanians/Bosnains are quite secular people too! So your map is just incorrect in this regard 100%.